The following excerpt is from Radcliff v. U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development, 920 F.2d 936 (9th Cir. 1990):
1 We affirm on this ground because the district court may have erred in dismissing for failure to state a claim, instead of applying the frivolousness standard appropriate for in forma pauperis complaints dismissed sua sponte before defendants are served. See Jackson v. State of Arizona, 885 F.2d 639, 640 (9th Cir.1989). However, we do not reach the issue of whether the district court applied the proper standard because we affirm on an alternate ground.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.