Legal Opinion

Meek v. City of Sacramento

District Court, N.D. California

Decided June 15, 1955No. Misc. 877PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HALBERT, District Judge.

Plaintiff has presented to this Court a motion seeking permission to file the above entitled action for damages in forma pauperis. With his motion, plaintiff has tendered for filing the complaint by which he proposes to institute the action.

Preliminarily it should be noted that leave to proceed in forma pauperis is a privilege and not a right, Clough v. Hunter, 10 Cir., 191 F.2d 516; Willis v. Utecht, 8 Cir., 185 F.2d 210; Johnson v. Hunter, 10 Cir., 144 F.2d 565; Prince v. Klune, 80 U.S.App. D.C. 31, 148 F.2d 18; and Dorsey v. Gill, 80 U.S.App.D.C. 9, 148 F.2d 857. A…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. McNutt v. General Motors Acceptance Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1936
  2. Mansfield, Coldwater & Lake Michigan Railway Co. v. SwanSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
  3. Lehigh Mining & Manufacturing Co. v. KellySupreme Court of the United States · 1895
  4. Dorsey v. GillCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1945
  5. Higgins v. SteeleCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1952

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Ardis O. Smart v. Robert A. Heinze, Warden, Folsom Prison, Represa, CaliforniaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1965
  2. United States ex rel. Spader v. WilentzDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1960
  3. Jefferson v. HeinzeDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1962
  4. In re MeekDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1956
  5. Smith v. Firestone Tire and Rubber CompanyDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1966

2 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