From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lazar v. County of Los Angeles

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Apr 21, 2010
377 F. App'x 611 (9th Cir. 2010)

Opinion

No. 08-56713.

Submitted April 5, 2010.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2).

Filed April 21, 2010.

Edward P. Lazar, Mt. Pleasant, SC, pro.

Millicent L. Rolon, Principal Deputy County Counsel, County Counsel, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California, Margaret M. Morrow, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. 2:07-cv-07549-MMM-FFM.

Before: RYMER, McKEOWN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.



MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Edward P. Lazar appeals pro se from the district court's order dismissing his action alleging violations of his constitutional rights. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion, Hearns v. San Bernardino Police Dep't, 530 F.3d 1124, 1129 (9th Cir. 2008), and we affirm.

Because the district court properly concluded that Lazar's complaint failed to meet the pleading standards under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8, and Lazar failed to amend the complaint after obtaining leave to do so, dismissal of the complaint with prejudice was not an abuse of discretion. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(1)-(3) (stating pleading requirements); Hearns, 530 F.3d at 1129-31 (discussing factors to determine whether initial dismissal under Rule 8 was proper and whether subsequent dismissal for failure to amend was an abuse of discretion).

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

Lazar v. County of Los Angeles

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Apr 21, 2010
377 F. App'x 611 (9th Cir. 2010)
Case details for

Lazar v. County of Los Angeles

Case Details

Full title:Edward P. LAZAR, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Apr 21, 2010

Citations

377 F. App'x 611 (9th Cir. 2010)