Legal Opinion

Andrew Verhines v. Shirley N. Weber

District Court, E.D. California

Decided February 12, 2026No. 1:24-cv-01111Unknown

1Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 ANDREW VERHINES, Case No. 1:24-cv-01111-KES-EPG 10 Plaintiffs, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, RECOMMENDING THAT DEFENDANT’S 11 v. MOTION TO DISMISS BE DENIED 12 SHIRLEY N. WEBER, (ECF No. 62) 13 Defendant. OBJECTIONS, IF ANY, DUE WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS 14 15 16 Plaintiff Andrew Verhines proceeds pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil action. 17 (ECF Nos. 1, 3, 61). Plaintiff challenges the constitutionality of California’s requirements to 18 qualify as a candidate for U.S. Congress in California’s 21st…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  2. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  3. Erickson v. PardusSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  4. Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  5. Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A.Supreme Court of the United States · 2002

21 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