Ninth Circuit· 9/26/2011

Silva v. Di Vittorio

Citations

658 F.3d 1090
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 19610
2011 WL 4436248

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

noting “two types of access to court claims: those involving prisoners’ right to affirmative assistance and those involving prisoners’ rights to litigate without active interference”
discussing requirements for an access-to-court claim premised on prison officials’ alleged interference, as opposed to affirmative assistance, with any prisoner lawsuit
differentiating “between two types of access to 14 court claims: those involving prisoners’ right to affirmative assistance and those involving 15 prisoners’ rights to litigate without active interference.”
differentiating “between two types of access 24 to court claims: those involving prisoners’ right to affirmative assistance and those involving 25 prisoners’ rights to litigate without active interference”
in- volving allegations that prison officials needlessly trans- ferred Mr. Silva to different facilities and destroyed certain legal documents
“Dismissal of a pro se complaint without leave to amend is proper only if it is 18 absolutely clear that the deficiencies of the complaint could not be cured by amendment.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: O'Scannlain, Paez, Kendall

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

23 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

46 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.