From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Phillips v. Salt River Police Dep't

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Dec 4, 2014
586 F. App'x 381 (9th Cir. 2014)

Summary

confirming the Ninth Circuit continues to apply the anti-claim splitting doctrine as laid out in Adams even after Taylor

Summary of this case from Battle Born Munitions, Inc. v. Dick's Sporting Goods, Inc.

Opinion

No. 13-16158

12-04-2014

BRIAN G. PHILLIPS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. SALT RIVER POLICE DEPARTMENT; et al., Defendants - Appellees.


NOT FOR PUBLICATION

D.C. No. 2:13-cv-00798-ROS MEMORANDUM Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona
Roslyn O. Silver, District Judge, Presiding
Before: LEAVY, FISHER, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

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

Brian G. Phillips appeals pro se from the district court's judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action arising out of an allegedly illegal seizure of his vehicle and personal property. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion a district court's dismissal of a later-filed action as duplicative. Adams v. Cal. Dep't of Health Servs., 487 F.3d 684, 688 (9th Cir. 2007), overruled on other grounds by Taylor v. Sturgell, 553 U.S. 880, 904 (2008). We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Phillips's action as duplicative of an earlier-filed action, Phillips v. Salt River Police Dep't, et al., No. 2:13-cv-00758-DGC, because the causes of action, relief sought, and parties are the same in both actions. See Adams, 487 F.3d at 689 (in determining whether a later-filed action is duplicative, this court examines "whether the causes of action and relief sought, as well as the parties or privities to the action, are the same").

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Phillips's request for extension of time to file his First Amended Complaint because he did not demonstrate good cause. See Ahanchian v. Xenon Pictures, Inc., 624 F.3d 1253, 1258 (9th Cir. 2010) (setting forth standard of review and discussing the requirements for an extension of time under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)).

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

Phillips v. Salt River Police Dep't

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Dec 4, 2014
586 F. App'x 381 (9th Cir. 2014)

confirming the Ninth Circuit continues to apply the anti-claim splitting doctrine as laid out in Adams even after Taylor

Summary of this case from Battle Born Munitions, Inc. v. Dick's Sporting Goods, Inc.
Case details for

Phillips v. Salt River Police Dep't

Case Details

Full title:BRIAN G. PHILLIPS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. SALT RIVER POLICE DEPARTMENT…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Dec 4, 2014

Citations

586 F. App'x 381 (9th Cir. 2014)

Citing Cases

Rosiere v. United States

The Ninth Circuit has repeatedly held that a district court may dismiss as frivolous a complaint "that merely…

Fairway Rest. Equip. Contracting, Inc. v. Makino

“We examine whether the causes of action and relief sought, as well as the parties or privies to the action,…