From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Campbell v. County of San Bernardino

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
May 9, 1983
705 F.2d 1128 (9th Cir. 1983)

Opinion

No. 81-5037.

Argued and Submitted April 8, 1983.

Decided May 9, 1983.

Stuart Campbell, pro se.

William J. Genego, Los Angeles, Cal., Sheryl Gordon McCloud, Toluca Lake, Cal., for plaintiffs-appellants.

Joseph Arias, San Bernardino, Cal., for defendant-appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California; Robert M. Takasugi, District Judge, Presiding.

Before GOODWIN, TANG and FLETCHER, Circuit Judges:


ORDER

The judgment of dismissal under Fed.R. Civ.P. 12(b)(6) is vacated. Construing the plaintiff's complaint liberally, as we must, we cannot say as a matter of law that under no conditions can it be said to state a claim. Colorable claims of Fourth Amendment and due process violations appear to have been asserted.

The premature termination of pro se cases under Rule 12(b)(6) is sometimes counter-productive. It creates extra work for both the trial court and this court. Without the development of an adequate legal and factual record, final review is difficult to achieve. The attention of the district court is called to the possibility of early enlistment of volunteer counsel from law schools or legal service organizations when retained counsel are not available.

Vacated and remanded.


Summaries of

Campbell v. County of San Bernardino

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
May 9, 1983
705 F.2d 1128 (9th Cir. 1983)
Case details for

Campbell v. County of San Bernardino

Case Details

Full title:STUART CAMPBELL AND DOUGLAS CAMPBELL, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, v. COUNTY OF…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: May 9, 1983

Citations

705 F.2d 1128 (9th Cir. 1983)

Citing Cases

Wainscott v. Cnty. of San Diego

"Only if it is absolutely clear that the deficiencies cannot be cured by amendment should the complaint be…