Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8689510
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
K'napp v. Knowles
No. 8689510 · Decided September 26, 2008
No. 8689510·Ninth Circuit · 2008·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
September 26, 2008
Citation
No. 8689510
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** Eric Charles Rodney K’napp appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his action with prejudice for failing to comply with Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review for an abuse of discretion, McHenry v. Renne, 84 F.3d 1172, 1177 (9th Cir.1996), and we affirm. Dismissal was proper because K’napp’s second amended complaint failed to comply with the district court’s previous order *162 requiring compliance with Rule 8. See id. at 1178-79 . Further, the district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing K’napp’s second amended complaint with prejudice, after granting leave to amend and determining that further amendment would be futile. See id. (dismissing complaint with prejudice for noncompliance with Rule 8 after first exploring less drastic alternatives). K’napp’s August 22, 2008 motion for necessary injunctive relief is denied. AFFIRMED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Plain English Summary
MEMORANDUM ** Eric Charles Rodney K’napp appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his action with prejudice for failing to comply with Fed.R.Civ.P.
Key Points
01MEMORANDUM ** Eric Charles Rodney K’napp appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his action with prejudice for failing to comply with Fed.R.Civ.P.
02Dismissal was proper because K’napp’s second amended complaint failed to comply with the district court’s previous order *162 requiring compliance with Rule 8.
03Further, the district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing K’napp’s second amended complaint with prejudice, after granting leave to amend and determining that further amendment would be futile.
04(dismissing complaint with prejudice for noncompliance with Rule 8 after first exploring less drastic alternatives).
Frequently Asked Questions
MEMORANDUM ** Eric Charles Rodney K’napp appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his action with prejudice for failing to comply with Fed.R.Civ.P.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for K'napp v. Knowles in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on September 26, 2008.
Use the citation No. 8689510 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.