Carol Lee Shulman v. United States of America Central Intelligence Agency

142 F.3d 445, 1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 15487, 1998 WL 228252
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedApril 28, 1998
Docket97-56315
StatusUnpublished

This text of 142 F.3d 445 (Carol Lee Shulman v. United States of America Central Intelligence Agency) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Carol Lee Shulman v. United States of America Central Intelligence Agency, 142 F.3d 445, 1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 15487, 1998 WL 228252 (9th Cir. 1998).

Opinion

142 F.3d 445

NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.
Carol Lee SHULMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
United States of America; Central Intelligence Agency,
Defendants-Appellees.

No. 97-56315.
D.C. No. CV-96-07030-IH.

United States Court of Appeals,
Ninth Circuit.

.
Submitted April 20, 19982.
Decided April 28, 1998.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Irving Hill, District Judge, Presiding.

Before BRUNETTI, RYMER, and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM1

Carol Lee Shulman appeals pro se the district court's dismissal with prejudice of her third amended complaint for failure to satisfy the pleading requirements of Fed.R.Civ.P. 8. We affirm.

Although the district court granted Shulman multiple opportunities to explain the nature of her claims against the United States and the Central Intelligence Agency, her third amended complaint is incomprehensible. Under these circumstances, the district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing Shulman's third amended complaint with prejudice. See McHenry v. Renne, 84 F.3d 1172, 1177-78 (9th Cir.1996).

AFFIRMED.

2

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a); 9th Cir. R. 34-4

1

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. 36-3

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Frank Shih, Jr. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
142 F.3d 445 (Ninth Circuit, 1998)
McHenry v. Renne
84 F.3d 1172 (Ninth Circuit, 1996)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
142 F.3d 445, 1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 15487, 1998 WL 228252, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carol-lee-shulman-v-united-states-of-america-central-intelligence-agency-ca9-1998.