Case ID: f-appx_321/html/0001-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Sharilyn M.A. Wms. HAWKINS, Appellant v. Emily HALEY and Kevin Jae Jackson, Appellees.
    No. 08-7130.
    United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.
    March 9, 2009.
    Sharilyn M.A. Wms. Hawkins, Washington, DC, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
    BEFORE: SENTELLE, Chief Judge, and TATEL and BROWN, Circuit Judges.
   JUDGMENT

This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the brief filed by appellant. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2); D.C.Cir. Rule 34(j). It is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court’s order filed October 24, 2008, 2008 WL 4725706, be affirmed. The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing appellant’s case without pi’ejudice on the ground that the complaint did not meet the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a). See Ciralsky v. CIA, 355 F.3d 661, 668-71 (D.C.Cir.2004). The dismissal without prejudice allows appellant to file a new complaint that meets the requirements of Rule 8(a). See id. at 669-70.

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution of any timely petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en bane. See Fed. R.App. P. 41(b); D.C.Cir. Rule 41.