Kelly v. Town of Chelmsford

13 F. App'x 11
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Kelly v. Town of Chelmsford. Read the opinion of the Court — 23 F. App'x 18
Court of Appeals for the First Circuit·Decided June 19, 2001·No. 00-2095·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

After affording plaintiff an opportunity to file an amended complaint which “clearly and concisely” set forth his claims, and after two hearings on the matter, the district court granted defendants’ motions to dismiss. Reviewing the dismissal de novo in light of the briefs and the record, we see no error. The complaint failed to understandably state a cognizable claim for relief and some of the relief demanded was not within the court’s jurisdiction. Plaintiffs memorandum response to the court’s order to clarify suggested that plaintiff was unable or unwilling to cure the deficiencies.

Affirmed.

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

Kelly v. Town of Chelmsford, 13 F. App'x 11 (1st Cir. 2001).

13 F. App'x 11 (Kelly v. Town of Chelmsford) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.