Legal Opinion

(PS) Creel v. Sacramento County Sheriff Department

District Court, E.D. California

Decided January 27, 2025No. 2:24-cv-01533Unknown

1Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CHAD MICHAEL CREEL, No. 2:24-cv-01533-KJM-SCR 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF DEPARTMENT, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 Plaintiff is proceeding pro se in this action, and accordingly this matter was referred to the 19 undersigned pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21). Plaintiff filed a motion for leave to proceed in 20 forma pauperis (“IFP”) which was granted. ECF No. 5. On November 5, 2024, the Court issued 21 an Order screening the original complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C.…

2Cases cited16 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. Neitzke v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1989

11 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