Legal Opinion

(PS) Conerly v. Winn

District Court, E.D. California

Decided September 16, 2020No. 2:20-cv-01833Unknown

1Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JAMES CONERLY, et al., No. 2:20-cv-01833 JAM AC PS 12 Plaintiffs, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 HON. JOHN P. WINN, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiffs are proceeding in this action pro se. This proceeding was referred to the 18 undersigned by Local Rule 302(c)(21). Plaintiffs have paid the filing fee, and new civil case 19 documents have issued. ECF No. 3. Upon review of the complaint, the undersigned concludes 20 that the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction to hear this case and…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Gilbert B. Martinez v. Eddie Ylst, Superintendent, California Medical Facility SouthCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1991
  2. Caterpillar Inc. v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  3. District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. FeldmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  4. Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1924
  5. Stump v. SparkmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1978

12 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