Michael Henry Ferdik v. Joe Bonzelet, Sheriff
- Decided
- May 22, 1992
- Docket
- 90-16834
- Status
- Published
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
Cited 6,768 timesNo negative treatment found in this library
What later courts said
- recognizing that district courts have inherent interest in 11 managing their dockets without being subject to noncompliant litigants — (SS) John v. Commissioner of Social Security (2020)
- recognizing that district courts have inherent interest in 2 managing their dockets without being subject to noncompliant litigants — (PC) Mcelroy v. George (2025)
- recognizing that district courts have inherent interest in 9 managing their dockets without being subject to noncompliant litigants — Alonzo v. Wal-Mart Associates, Inc. (2022)
Each line is a later court’s own words about this case, not a summary. Read the opinion before relying on it.
How the opinion begins
CHOY, Circuit Judge:
Appellant Michael Henry Ferdik appeals pro se the judgment of the District Court for the District of Arizona of November 5, 1990 dismissing his claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 after he violated a court order by failing to file a second amended complaint in a timely manner. We affirm.
I.
Statutes cited
Cite this
Michael Henry Ferdik v. Joe Bonzelet, Sheriff, 963 F.2d 1258 (1992)Read the full opinion
Free account needed
Reading the library on this site uses your account’s daily calls, the same as the connector and the API. The Free plan needs no card. Calls a day on each plan.