(PS) Aderholt v. Edwards
District Court, E.D. California
1Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DANIEL ADERHOLT, No. 2:23-cv-0289 DJC DB PS 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 ANN EDWARDS, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff Daniel Aderholt is proceeding in this action pro se. This matter was referred to 18 the undersigned in accordance with Local Rule 302(c)(21) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Pending 19 before the Court are plaintiff’s complaint and motion to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 20 U.S.C. § 1915. (ECF Nos. 1 & 2.) Therein, plaintiff complains about “Sacramento County . . . 21 NO…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Neitzke v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Lopez v. SmithCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
- Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Environmental Services (TOC), Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2000
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.