Legal Opinion

Amezquita v. Hough

District Court, S.D. California

Decided February 23, 2021No. 3:19-cv-01461Unknown

1Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JOSE G. AMEZQUITA, Case No.: 3:19-cv-01461-AJB-KSC 12 Plaintiff, REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 13 v. FOR ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR 14 CORRECTIONAL OFFICER SUMMARY JUDGMENT; D. HOUGH, et al., 15 ORDER DENYING MOTION TO Defendants. APPOINT COUNSEL 16 17 [Doc. Nos. 47, 49] 18 19 Plaintiff Jose Amezquita (“plaintiff”) is a prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 20 pauperis in this civil rights action filed pursuant to Title

42, United States Code, Section 21

1983. See Doc. Nos. 1, 25. Plaintiff alleges…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Estelle v. GambleSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  3. Farmer v. BrennanSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  4. Gilbert B. Martinez v. Eddie Ylst, Superintendent, California Medical Facility SouthCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1991
  5. Woodford v. NgoSupreme Court of the United States · 2006

25 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