Watts v. Flemming

Full title: Timothy WATTS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Bob FLEMMING, Kent Ward, Ron Ward…

Court: United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Jul 25, 1989

888 F.2d 131 (9th Cir. 1989)

Opinion

888 F.2d 131 (9th Cir. 1989) Timothy WATTS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Bob FLEMMING, Kent Ward, Ron Ward, Teri Blankenbaker and John Grill, Defendants-Appellees. Timothy WATTS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Manfred MAASS, Sid Coleman, Steve Gassner, Carl Beals and Debie Martin, Defendants-Appellees. Timothy WATTS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Manfred MAASS, Sid Coleman, Steve Gassner, Carl Beals and Debie Martin, Defendants-Appellees. Nos. 88-3954, 88-3955 and 88-3956. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit July 25, 1989

Editorial Note:

This opinion appears in the Federal reporter in a table titled "Table of Decisions Without Reported Opinions". (See FI CTA9 Rule 36-3 regarding use of unpublished opinions)

Decided Oct. 11, 1989.

D.Or.

AFFIRMED.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon, Helen J. Frye, District Judge, Presiding.

Before BROWNING, KOZINSKI and RYMER, Circuit Judges.

Memorandum ^**

** This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-30.

Dismissal for lack of prosecution was warranted as plaintiff failed to heed repeated orders to submit a narrative statement and to show cause why dismissal would not be appropriate. The absence of "exceptional circumstances" justified the district court's denial of plaintiff's motions for appointment of counsel under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) (1982). Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328, 1330-31 (9th Cir.1986). The district court did not abuse its discretion by failing to find voluntary counsel to represent plaintiff.

AFFIRMED.