Guzman-Rivera, v. Rivera-Cruz, et al.,
Case Date: 10/16/1997
Court: United States Court of Appeals
Docket No: 97-1743
|
[NOT FOR PUBLICATION] UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT ____________________ No. 97-1743 HECTOR GUZMAN-RIVERA, ET AL., Plaintiffs, Appellants, v. HECTOR RIVERA-CRUZ, ET AL., Defendants, Appellees. ____________________ APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO [Hon. Gilberto Gierbolini-Ortiz, Senior U.S. District Judge] __________________________ ____________________ Before Torruella, Chief Judge, ___________ Stahl and Lynch, Circuit Judges. ______________ ____________________ Juan R. Requena Davila and Law Offices Alvaro R. Calderon, Jr. on _______________________ ___________________________________ brief for appellant. Esther Castro Schmidt and Gaztambide & Plaza on brief for _______________________ ____________________ appellees. ____________________ October 14, 1997 ____________________ Per Curiam. We have reviewed the briefs submitted by ___________ the parties and the record on appeal, and we affirm. Appellants argue the court abused its discretion when it dismissed the action without prejudice after being advised the appellants could not locate two essential witnesses. An abuse of discretion may not be found unless the court's error resulted in substantial prejudice to the movant. United States v. Saccoccia, 58 F.3d 754, 770 (1st ___________________________ Cir. 1995). We see no prejudice here, since the district court offered appellants the opportunity to return to court if they were able to locate their witnesses within a reasonable amount of time. Affirmed. Loc. R. 27.1. ________ -2- |