FlawCheck Citator
Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 10160951
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

R. Kulick v. Marissa Mills

No. 10160951 · Decided October 24, 2024
No. 10160951 · Ninth Circuit · 2024 · FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
October 24, 2024
Citation
No. 10160951
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS OCT 24 2024 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT R. J. KULICK, No. 23-55663 Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:23-cv-00571-GW-PVC v. MEMORANDUM* MARISSA MILLS, AKA Marissa Hemme; ADELE MILLS, AKA Adele Reinstein; SHARON TOWERS LLC, AKA Sharon Towers Apartments; ANNE MILLS; HAROLD MILLS; RITA SINDER; JACK SINDER; MEISLER TRUST CONSOLIDATION PARTNERSHIP; SHARON TOWERS CO., a general partnership; ADELE TRUST; ADRIAN GUERRERO; PETER STEINMAN; DOES, 1 to 100, inclusive, Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California George H. Wu, District Judge, Presiding Submitted October 16, 2024** Before: SILVERMAN, R. NELSON, and MILLER, Circuit Judges. * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). R. J. Kulick appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his action alleging various federal claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion a dismissal for failure to serve the summons and complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m). Oyama v. Sheehan (In re Sheehan), 253 F.3d 507, 511 (9th Cir. 2001). We affirm. The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing Kulick’s action without prejudice because Kulick failed to effect proper service of the summons and complaint, despite being given notice, opportunities, and directives to do so, and Kulick did not establish good cause for his failure to serve. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(a)-(c) (setting forth requirements for service of process, including that the summons must be served with a copy of the complaint); Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m) (explaining that district court may dismiss for failure to serve after providing notice and absent a showing of good cause). All pending requests are denied. AFFIRMED. 2 23-55663
Plain English Summary
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS OCT 24 2024 MOLLY C.
Key Points
Frequently Asked Questions
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS OCT 24 2024 MOLLY C.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for R. Kulick v. Marissa Mills in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on October 24, 2024.
Use the citation No. 10160951 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.
Why Attorneys Choose FlawFinder

Why Attorneys Choose FlawFinder

Side-by-side with Westlaw and LexisNexis

Feature FlawFinder Westlaw LexisNexis
Monthly price$19 – $99$133 – $646$153 – $399
ContractNone1–3 year min1–6 year min
Hidden fees$0, alwaysUp to $469/search$25/mo + per-doc
FlawCheck citatorIncludedKeyCite ($$$)Shepard's ($$$)
Plain-English summaryIncludedNoNo
CancelOne clickTermination feesAccount friction
Related Cases

Full legal research for $19/month

All 50 states · Federal regulations · Case law · Police SOPs · AI analysis included · No contract

Continue Researching →