Legal Opinion

(PC) Murphy v. Rudas

District Court, E.D. California

Decided February 10, 2020No. 2:20-cv-00073Unknown

1Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MONRELL D. MURPHY, No. 2:20-cv-0073 TLN DB P 12 Plaintiff, 13 RUDAS, et al.. ORDER 14 Defendants. 15 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action under

42 U.S.C. § 17

1983. Before the court are plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis and plaintiff’s 18 complaint for screening. For the reasons set forth below, this court grants plaintiff’s motion to 19 proceed in forma pauperis, finds plaintiff has stated a cognizable claim, and gives plaintiff an 20 opportunity to…

2Cases cited33 opinions

  1. Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  2. Neitzke v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  3. Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A.Supreme Court of the United States · 2002
  4. Harry Franklin v. Ms. Murphy and Hoyt CuppCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1984
  5. Johnson v. DuffyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1978

28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API