Legal Opinion

(PS) Hill v. City of Sacramento

District Court, E.D. California

Decided December 20, 2022No. 2:22-cv-01625Unknown

1Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ARNITHA HILL, et al., No. 2:22-cv-01625 DAD AC (PS) 12 Plaintiffs, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 CITY OF SACRAMENTO, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff Arnitha Hill is proceeding in this matter pro se, and pre-trial proceedings are 18 accordingly referred to the undersigned pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21). Although the 19 complaint names several other individuals as plaintiffs (Diana Fields, Anthony Ganderson, 20 Brejonna Ganderson, Montreal Ganderson, Unique Fields, and Marlo Hill), only…

2Cases cited47 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. Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972

42 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