(PS) Austin v. Tetrault
District Court, E.D. California
1Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 GEORGE AUSTIN, esq., No. 2:20-cv-0216 KJM DB PS 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 GABRIELLE TETRAULT, esq., et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff George Austin is proceeding in this action pro se. This matter was referred to the 18 undersigned in accordance with Local Rule 302(c)(21) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Pending 19 before the court are plaintiff’s second amended complaint and motion to proceed in forma 20 pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. (ECF Nos. 2 & 13.) The second…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Neitzke v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Gilbert B. Martinez v. Eddie Ylst, Superintendent, California Medical Facility SouthCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1991
- Lopez v. SmithCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.