(PC) Hill v. Newsom
District Court, E.D. California
1Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 NATHAN HILL, No. 2:19-cv-1680 JAM AC P 11 Plaintiff, 12 v. ORDER 13 GAVIN NEWSOM, et al., 14 Defendants. 15 16 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, seeks relief pursuant to
42 U.S.C. § 1983
and 17 has requested authority pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 1915
to proceed in forma pauperis. This 18 proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 302 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). 19 Before this court are plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis, a “motion for 20 clarity,” and plaintiff’s first…
2Cases cited44 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Estelle v. GambleSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Farmer v. BrennanSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
39 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.