Gallegos v. Slidell Police Dept, et al, No. 08-30248 (5th Cir. 2008)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED No. 08-30248 Summary Calendar December 23, 2008 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk RICHARD GALLEGOS, JR Plaintiff-Appellant v. SLIDELL POLICE DEPARTMENT; Slidell Police Officers; UNIDENTIFIED PARTIES Defendants-Appellees Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana USDC No. 2:07-CV-9494 Before JONES, Chief Judge, and DENNIS and HAYNES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Richard Gallegos, Jr. appeals the district court s dismissal of his civil rights complaint for failure to comply with a court order to identify by name the Slidell police officers discussed in his complaint. Although the district court dismissed Gallegos s suit without prejudice, the dismissal is effectively with prejudice due to the one-year statute of limitations. See Owens v. Okure, * Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. No. 08-30248 488 U.S. 235, 249-50 (1989); Long v. Simmons, 77 F.3d 878, 880 (5th Cir. 1996); Davis v. Louisiana State Univ., 876 F.2d 412, 413 (5th Cir. 1989). The record does not show that Gallegos s failure to comply with the court s order was the result of contumaciousness or an attempt to delay the proceedings. See Berry v. CIGNA/RSI-CIGNA, 975 F.2d 1188, 1191 (5th Cir. 1992). Additionally, Gallegos was likely entitled to conduct discovery to determine the identities of the unnamed defendants, as [i]t is conceivable that readily available documentation would reveal the identities of the officers who participated in the allegedly illegal arrest. See Murphy v. Kellar, 950 F.2d 290, 293 (5th Cir. 1992). Consequently, the judgment of the district court is REVERSED and the case is REMANDED to afford Gallegos the opportunity to conduct discovery. See id. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
