Legal Opinion

Cordell v. Tilton

District Court, S.D. California

Decided September 17, 2007No. Civil 07cv0079 J(RBB)PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER:

1)ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE BROOKS’ R & R;

2)GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS [DOC. NO. 8]; AND

3)DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LEAVE OF COURT TO AMEND [DOC NO. 11]

NAPOLEON A. JONES, JR., District Judge.

Plaintiff Walter Cordell, III (“Plaintiff’) filed a civil rights complaint (“Complaint”) pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (“Section 1983”) in which he alleges that his parole supervisors (“Defendants”) imposed and enforced unconstitutional conditions of parole that effectively banished Plaintiff from his home, violated his right to due process by extending his period of parole beyond…

2Cases cited101 opinions

  1. Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Servs.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
  2. Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  3. Harlow v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  4. Will v. Michigan Department of State PoliceSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  5. Heck v. HumphreySupreme Court of the United States · 1994

96 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Mendia v. GarciaDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2016
  2. DeBiaso v. SpitzDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 2013
  3. Frank v. YatesDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2012
  4. Guzman Bernal v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Alaska · 2024
  5. Lundstrom v. YoungDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2022

1 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