Matthews v. Rakiey

Opinion

[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

No. 97-1968

LLOYD MATTHEWS,

Plaintiff, Appellant,

v.

PAUL RAKIEY, ET AL.,

Defendants, Appellees.

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

[Hon. William G. Young, U.S. District Judge]

Before

Selya, Circuit Judge,

Cyr, Senior Circuit Judge,

and Boudin, Circuit Judge.

Katharine F. Zupan and Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi L.L.P. on

brief for appellant. Nancy Ankers White, Special Assistant Attorney General, and Joel

J. Berner, Counsel, Department of Correction, on brief for appellees.

December 9, 1997

Per Curiam. Upon careful review of the briefs and

record, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its

discretion in denying plaintiff's 1993 or 1995 motions to

amend his complaint. Even in light of plaintiff's prior pro

se status and his various letters and motions in 1990-1991,

we cannot say that the district court was required in 1990-

1991 to offer plaintiff any additional advice or to create

any additional opportunity for plaintiff to amend his

complaint.

Affirmed. See 1st Cir. Loc. R. 27.1.

-2-