Lonnie Harris v. Eddie Alves

388 F. App'x 623
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedJuly 19, 2010
Docket08-35487
StatusUnpublished

This text of 388 F. App'x 623 (Lonnie Harris v. Eddie Alves) 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
Lonnie Harris v. Eddie Alves, 388 F. App'x 623 (9th Cir. 2010).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Lonnie Harris appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment for defendants in Harris’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging violations of his First and Fourteenth Amendment rights and his rights under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc-l (2000). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion a denial of a motion to stay. United States v. Peninsula Commc’ns, Inc., 287 F.3d 832, 838 (9th Cir.2002). We vacate and remand.

The record shows that Harris repeatedly notified the district court that he was being denied access to photocopying and postage services for his legal mail during his detention at the Pierce County Detention and Corrections Center (“PCDCC”). See Lockyer v. Mirant Corp., 398 F.3d 1098, 1110 (9th Cir.2005) (setting forth competing interests that must be weighed when granting or denying a stay, including the hardship or inequity which a party may suffer in being required to go forward). After Harris filed this appeal, the PCDCC allowed Harris access to photocopying and postage services for his legal mail, and Harris filed more than one hundred pages of briefs and exhibits on appeal. We vacate the judgment and remand to allow the district court to consider these documents in the first instance.

The parties shall bear their own costs on appeal.

VACATED and REMANDED.

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 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

United States v. Peninsula Communications, Inc.
287 F.3d 832 (Ninth Circuit, 2002)
Lockyer v. Mirant Corp.
398 F.3d 1098 (Ninth Circuit, 2005)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
388 F. App'x 623, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lonnie-harris-v-eddie-alves-ca9-2010.