Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-92-04128/USCOURTS-ca10-92-04128-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Norman H. Bangerter
Appellee
Walter Chavez
Appellant
Dental Clinic
Appellee
Gospol Library
Appellee

Document Text:

FIL ,.. J 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEAL3.Jnited States Cot.-i of Appea~ 

Tenth Circuit 

TENTH CIRCUIT 

WALTER CHAVEZ, ) 

) 

Plaintiff-Appellant, ) 

) 

V . ) 

) 

0. LANE McCOTTER, individually ) 

and as Director at the Utah State) 

Prison; TODO WANTANABE; R. TRYS; ) 

OFFICER SORENSON, ) 

) 

Defendants-Appellees. ) 

WALTER CHAVEZ, ) 

) 

Plaintiff-Appellant, ) 

) 

V. ) 

) 

0 . LANE MCCOTTER, TAMARA HOLDEN, ) 

FRED HURST, TODO WANTANABE, R. ) 

TRYS, OFFICER SORENSON, UTAH ) 

STATE PRISON MEDICAL DEPARTMENT ) 

STAFF, ) 

) 

Defendants-Appellees. ) 

WALTER CHAVEZ, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v. 

NORMAN H. BANGERTER, Governor; 

DENTAL CLINIC; GOSPOL LIBRARY, 

Defendants-Appellees. 

FEBO 2 1993 

ROBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk . 

No. 92 - 4126 

(D.C . No. 92-C-199-J) 

(D. Utah) 

No. 92-4127 

(D.C. No. 92-C- 210-G) 

(D. Utah) 

No . 92-4128 

(D . C . No. 92-C-215-S) 

(D. Utah) 

Appellate Case: 92-4128 Document: 010110165528 Date Filed: 02/02/1993 Page: 1 
WALTER CUPERTINO CHAVEZ ALVAREZ, ) 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v. 

TAMARA HOLDEN, Warden, Utah 

State Prison, 

Defendant-Appellee. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

No. 92-4132 

(D.C. No. 92-C-442-W) 

(D. Utah) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

Befo re TACHA, BALDOCK, and KELLY, Circuit Judges. 

After examining the briefs and appellate records, this panel 

has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially 

assist the determination of these appeals. See Fed. R. App. P. 

34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1 . 9. The cases are therefore ordered 

submitted without oral argument. 

In these four cases, the United States District Court for the 

District of Utah, on the Reports and Recommendations of the 

Magistrate Judge, concluded that the claims included in Walter 

Chavez's almost incomprehensible pleadings lacked arguable bases 

either in law or in fact. The court thus provisionally dismissed 

those claims as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) , provided that 

Chavez was granted either fifteen or twenty days to amend his 

pleadings to allege more facts. When Chavez failed to do so, 

judgment was entered against him in each case. Because we agree 

* This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall 

not be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, 

except for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of 

the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel . 10th Cir. R. 

3 6. 3. 

-2 -

Appellate Case: 92-4128 Document: 010110165528 Date Filed: 02/02/1993 Page: 2 
with the district court that Chavez's original pleadings lacked 

arguable bases in law or in fact, and because Chavez elected t o 

forego the opportunity to supplement his inadequate pleadings, we 

find these appeals also to be frivolous and DISMISS under 28 

U.S.C. § 1915 (d). See Nietzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319 (1989 ) . 

The mandate shall issue forthwith. 

-3 -

ENTERED FOR THE COURT 

Deanell Reece Tacha 

Circuit Judge 

Appellate Case: 92-4128 Document: 010110165528 Date Filed: 02/02/1993 Page: 3