Legal Opinion

(PS) Walton v. Hopper

District Court, E.D. California

Decided March 21, 2022No. 2:22-cv-00453Unknown

1Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 GREGORY WAYNE WALTON II and No. 2:22-cv-00453 JAM AC PS ELIJAH WALTON III, 12 Plaintiffs, 13 ORDER and v. 14 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AMANDA HOPPER, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 Plaintiff has commenced this action pro se. The matter was accordingly referred to the 19 undersigned by E.D. Cal. 302(c)(21). Plaintiff has filed a request for leave to proceed in forma 20 pauperis (“IFP”), and has submitted the affidavit required by that statute. See 28 U.S.C. 21 § 1915(a)(1). The motion to proceed IFP…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  2. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  3. Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Servs.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
  4. Erickson v. PardusSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  5. Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972

25 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