33:T555,{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"Legislation","name":"Roy Douglas Hurst v. State of California, 451 F.2d 350","datePublished":"1971-12-10","legislationDate":"1971-12-10","citation":"Roy Douglas Hurst v. State of California, 451 F.2d 350 (9th Cir. 1971)","countryOfOrigin":"USA","jurisdiction":"Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit","description":"Read the full text of Roy Douglas Hurst v. State of California (Roy Douglas Hurst v. State of California, 451 F.2d 350 (9th Cir. 1971)). This legal opinion, filed in 1971-12-10, from the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit discusses important legal matters. Access this case and related legal documents on Midpage, an AI-powered legal research platform.","mainEntityOfPage":{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https://app.midpage.ai/document/roy-douglas-hurst-v-state-300065"},"author":{"@type":"Organization","name":"Midpage"},"publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"Midpage"},"url":"https://app.midpage.ai/document/roy-douglas-hurst-v-state-300065","isPartOf":{"@type":"WebSite","name":"Midpage","url":"https://app.midpage.ai"},"inLanguage":"en","keywords":"legal, opinion, document, research, midpage, Roy Douglas Hurst v. State of California, Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, Roy Douglas Hurst v. State of California, 451 F.2d 350 (9th Cir. 1971)","isAccessibleForFree":true,"isFamilyFriendly":true}35:T45c, PER CURIAM:

Plaintiffs, inmates at California Men’s Colony, appeal from an “Order Dismissing Complaint” that was based upon their failure to allege the names of any defendants in the caption of the complaint other than the “State of California, Et Al.” The State of California was found to be an improper defendant under the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

A dismissal of a complaint without dismissal of the action is not a “final order” under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 because the complaint is still open to amendment. Since we find no “special circumstances” here which indicate that the court below determined that the complaint could not be saved by amendment, the order is not appealable. Jackson v. Nelson (9 Cir. 1968), 405 F.2d 872, 873. See also Rule 21, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

The appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.