F I L E D
United States Court of Appeals
Tenth Circuit
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
MAR 27 2002
TENTH CIRCUIT
PATRICK FISHER
Clerk
LEONARD STEVE WESTFALL,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v. No. 01-1538
(D. C. No. 01-ES-1971)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT (D. Colorado)
FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT;
COLORADO STATE
COMPENSATION INSURANCE
AUTHORITY; COLORADO
DIVISION OF LABOR; COLORADO
DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE
HEARINGS; COLORADO STATE
ATTORNEY GENERAL’S OFFICE,
Colorado Attorney General’s Office ex
rel; GILPIN COUNTY DISTRICT
COURT; JEFFERSON COUNTY
DISTRICT COURT; GILPIN
COUNTY; SUMMIT COUNTY;
GARFIELD COUNTY; GARY
SANDBLOM, P.C.; JAQUELINE
SANDBLOM, N.P.; CHARLES
EWING, Blackjack Towing; and
GILPIN COUNTY SHERIFF’S
DEPARTMENT,
Defendants - Appellees.
ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
*
This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the
doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. This court
(continued...)
Before TACHA, Chief Judge, EBEL, and LUCERO, Circuit Judges.
After examining the briefs and the appellate record, this three-judge panel
has determined unanimously that oral argument would not be of material
assistance in the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th
Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
Plaintiff Westfall appeals from an order of the district court dismissing
without prejudice his complaints and a further order of the district court denying a
motion to reconsider that dismissal. Plaintiff appeals pro se alleging bias on the
part of the district court. He further alleges that the district court took various
actions that, according to plaintiff, were either mistaken or fraudulent.
We construe the filings in this court liberally, as we are required to do
under the standards of Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520-21 (1972). The
district court also construed the pleadings in that court liberally. Plaintiff filed
pro se two complaints in the district court. The magistrate judge ordered the
clerk of court to begin a civil action and ordered plaintiff to cure several
enumerated deficiencies within thirty days if he wished to pursue his claims.
*
(...continued)
generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order
and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.
-2-
Plaintiff failed to cure the deficiencies and instead filed a notice of appeal from
what was clearly a non-final action in the district court. After further
requirements that plaintiff file an amended complaint that would comply with the
pleading requirements of Rule 8(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Mr.
Westfall again failed to comply. The district court therefore dismissed the
complaints and the action in the district court without prejudice for failure to
prosecute.
We find that there was no error in the determinations of the district court.
Plaintiff clearly has not met the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a) in the filing
of his complaints in the district court. We therefore affirm the order of the
district court for substantially the reasons given by the magistrate judge and the
district court. Plaintiff’s motion for leave to proceed without prepayment of costs
or fees is granted. AFFIRMED.
ENTERED FOR THE COURT,
Deanell Reece Tacha
Circuit Judge
-3-