Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Johnson v. Dovey

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


August 4, 2009

GARRISON S. JOHNSON, PLAINTIFF,
v.
JOHN DOVEY, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Lawrence J. O'Neill United States District Judge

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR ENTRY OF JUDGMENT (Doc. 33)

Plaintiff Garrison Johnson ("plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On May 4, 2009, the Magistrate Judge issued a Findings and Recommendations, recommending inter alia, that Plaintiff's claims against defendants Dovey, Sullivan, F. Gonzalez, Carrasco, Zanchi, Magallanes, and Cannon be dismissed for Plaintiff's failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. (Doc. 20.) On July 9, 2009, the District Judge issued an order adopting the Findings and Recommendations in full. (Doc. 27.) Plaintiff now moves for entry of judgment pursuant to Rule 54(b). (Doc. 33.)

There exists "a long-settled and prudential policy against the scattershot disposition of litigation," and "entry of judgment under [Rule 54(b)] should not be indulged as a matter of routine or as a magnanimous accommodation to lawyers or litigants." Spiegel v. Trustees of Tufts College, 843 F.2d 38, 42 (9th Cir. 1988) (citations omitted). "Judgments under Rule 54(b) must be reserved for the unusual case in which the costs and risks of multiplying the number of proceedings and of overcrowding the appellate docket are outbalanced by the pressing needs of the litigants for an early and separate judgment as to some claims or parties." Morrison-Knudsen Co., Inc. v. Archer, 655 F.2d 962, 965 (9th Cir. 1981).

Besides stating that he wishes to appeal the order immediately, Plaintiff makes no showing as to why judgment should be granted pursuant to Rule 54(b) and upon review of the record, the Court finds no grounds upon which to grant the motion. Accordingly, the motion for entry of final judgment pursuant to Rule 54(b) is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20090804

© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.