Legal Opinion

(PS) Bridgeman v. San Joaquin Child Protective Services

District Court, E.D. California

Decided November 1, 2019No. 2:19-cv-02108Unknown

1Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 REGINNA BRIDGEMAN, No. 2:19-cv-02108 JAM AC (PS) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 SAN JOAQUIN CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES, 15 Defendant. 16 17 18 Plaintiff is proceeding in this action pro se. This 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”) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, and has submitted the affidavit required by that 21 statute. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). ECF No. 2. The motion to proceed IFP…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  2. Neitzke v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  3. Scheuer v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  4. Lopez v. SmithCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
  5. McHenry v. RenneCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1996

13 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