Legal Opinion

(PC) Wilkins v. Heslop

District Court, E.D. California

Decided August 19, 2024No. 2:20-cv-01622Unknown

1Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 KEENAN WILKINS, No. 2:20-cv-01622 DJC SCR P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 S. HESLOP, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 Plaintiff Keenan Wilkins, a state prisoner, proceeds pro se with claims under

42 U.S.C. § 19

1983 asserting excessive force, retaliation, and violations of due process and equal protection. 20 Plaintiff also brings state law claims. Plaintiff’s motion to compel discovery is before the court. 21 (ECF No. 62.) For the reasons set forth below, the motion to compel is granted in part and denied…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Soto v. City of ConcordDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1995
  2. Henry W. Kerr v. United States District Court for the Northern District of California, John Van Geldern, Real Parties in InterestCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1975
  3. Sanchez v. City of Santa AnaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990
  4. Kelly v. City of San JoseDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1987
  5. Shweta Kohli v. Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney GeneralCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007

3 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