(PC) Williams v. Trimpey
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 ANTHONY LEE WILLIAMS, No. 2:24-cv-02148 SCR P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 TRIMPEY, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a county inmate proceeding pro se with a civil rights action under
42 U.S.C. § 18
1983. Plaintiff has requested leave to proceed in forma pauperis under
28 U.S.C. § 1915
and 19 submitted a declaration showing that he cannot afford to pay the entire filing fee. (ECF No. 9.) 20 Accordingly, plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis is granted.1 21 Also before the undersigned is…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Erickson v. PardusSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Neitzke v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Heck v. HumphreySupreme Court of the United States · 1994
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.