Legal Opinion

(PS) Edison v. Los Angeles Police Department

District Court, E.D. California

Decided September 10, 2020No. 2:20-cv-01304Unknown

1Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 LEWIS EDISON, No. 2:20–cv–1304–KJM–KJN PS 12 Plaintiff, ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO DISMISS 13 v. (ECF Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5.) 14 LOS ANGELES POLICE DEPARTMENT, 15 Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff, who is proceeding without counsel in this action, previously requested leave to 18 proceed in forma pauperis under

28 U.S.C. § 1915.1

(ECF No. 2.) On July 14, 2020, the court 19 granted plaintiff’s IFP application, screened his complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. The court 20 found that plaintiff’s original…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  2. Neitzke v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  3. Gilbert B. Martinez v. Eddie Ylst, Superintendent, California Medical Facility SouthCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1991
  4. Lopez v. SmithCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
  5. Jena Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Department Al Olsen, Police Chief, Individually and as a Police AgentCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990

9 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