
USCA1 Opinion

	




                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT                                 ____________________        No. 97-1028        No. 97-1767                                GERTRUDE DAVIS GOROD,                                Plaintiff, Appellant,                                          v.                        COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS, ET AL.,                                Defendants, Appellees.                                 ____________________                    APPEALS FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS                   [Hon. Edward F. Harrington, U.S. District Judge]                                               ___________________                                 ____________________                                        Before                                Torruella, Chief Judge,                                           ___________                           Stahl and Lynch, Circuit Judges.                                            ______________                                 ____________________            Gertrude Davis Gorod on briefs pro se.            ____________________            Scott Harshbarger,  Attorney General, and Jason Barshak, Assistant            _________________                         _____________        Attorney General, on briefs for appellees.                                 ____________________                                   October 9, 1997                                 ____________________                 Per  Curiam.  Appellant Gertrude Gorod seeks to overturn                 ___________            a  district  court  order that  dismissed  her  complaint for            damages  under 42 U.S.C.    1983 for  the failure  to state a            claim upon  which relief  can be granted.   While  this court            generally disfavors such dismissals absent advance notice and            an opportunity to amend, see,  e.g., Wyatt v. City of Boston,                                     ___   ____  _____    ______________            35 F.3d 13, 14-15 (1st  Cir. 1994); Street v. Fair,  918 F.2d                                                ______    ____            269, 272 (1st  Cir. 1990)(per curiam), here it  is clear that            appellant cannot prove  any set of  facts that would  entitle            her  to  relief.   Accordingly,  the  order  of dismissal  is            summarily affirmed.   See  Local Rule  27.1.   Appellant also                      ________    ___            challenges  an  order  denying  her  motion  to  default  the            defendants.   This  order was  issued after  the judgment  of            dismissal had  entered and the  case was docketed  on appeal.            It  is  therefore  a  nullity.       Appeal  no.  97-1767  is            dismissed.1                      1            _________                                            ____________________               1We  further  note  that  the  defendants  were  never  in               1            default.  The  case was dismissed before  their answer became            due.                                          -2-
