Legal Opinion
Hall v. California Department of Corrections
District Court, N.D. California
Decided October 19, 1993No. C 92-20428 JWPublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS
WARE, District Judge.
Defendants California Department of Corrections (“CDC”), E.R. Myers, Joe Basso, Jim Marsh and David Tristan move to dismiss this action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Defendants’ argue that Plaintiffs complaint fails to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 because (1) Plaintiff has not identified the deprivation of a constitutional right, and (2) even if Plaintiff suffered such a deprivation, he was not denied due process of law. As set forth more fully below, the Court finds that Plaintiff was deprived of…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Board of Regents of State Colleges v. RothSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Morrissey v. BrewerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Daniels v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Los Angeles Police Protective League v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1994
- Alejado v. City & County of HonoluluHawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals · 1999
- Asquith v. Volunteers of AmericaDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1998
- Kelley v. Edison TownshipDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2005
- 96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2375, 96 Daily Journal D.A.R. 3950 Wmx Technologies, Inc., F/k/a/ Waste Management, Inc., a Delaware Corporation and Waste Management of California, Inc., a California Corporation v. Edwin L. Miller, Jr., as District Attorney of San Diego County, CaliforniaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1996
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.