Legal Opinion

(PC) Ardds v. Martin

District Court, E.D. California

Decided March 4, 2020No. 2:20-cv-00133Unknown

1Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ANTOINE L. ARDDS, No. 2:20-cv-0133 KJN P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 KENNETH MARTIN, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 I. Introduction 18 Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding pro se. Plaintiff seeks relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 19 § 1983, and has requested leave to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. This 20 proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 302 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 21 Plaintiff submitted a declaration that makes the showing required by 28 U.S.C. §…

2Cases cited51 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. Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957

46 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