Segui ex rel. Ortiz v. O'Rourke

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

March 3, 1964.

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1964-03-03

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently November 1965

1 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

2 counsel of record

Relies on Stanley J. Breier, Dba Bayshore Bowl v. Northern California Bowling Proprietors' Association, a Corporation, Monument Bowl, Inc., a California Corporation v. Northern California Bowling Proprietors' Association, a Corporation

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by Per Curiam · Decided 1964-03-03

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Fitzsimmons & Petris, Edward R. Fitzsimmons, and Ruth S. Harwitz, Oakland, Cal., for appellants.

Schwab & Kant, and Oliver Schwab, Beverly Hills, Cal., for appellees.

Before BARNES, HAMLEY and BROWNING, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

¶1

The record discloses no responsive pleading had been filed when this action was dismissed. Rule 15(a), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is applicable. Cf. Breier v. Northern California Bowling Proprietors Ass'n, 9 Cir. 1963, 316 F.2d 787.

¶2

The judgment of dismissal is reversed, and the action remanded with leave to plaintiffs to amend, if they so desire.