Legal Opinion

(PC) Hearns v. Cisnero

District Court, E.D. California

Decided August 21, 2023No. 1:22-cv-01033Unknown

1Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CLARENCE L. HEARNS, Case No.: 1:22-cv-1033-JLT-CDB (PC) 12 Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO 13 v. DISMISS ACTION FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM 14 CISNERO, et al., (Doc. 29) 15 Defendants. 14-DAY OBJECTION PERIOD 16 17 18 Plaintiff Clarence L. Hearns is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights 19 action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 20 I. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND 21 Plaintiff initiated this action with the filing of his original complaint on August 16, 2022. 22 (Doc. 1.) That same…

2Cases cited35 opinions

  1. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  2. Farmer v. BrennanSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  3. Neitzke v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  4. Wolff v. McDonnellSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  5. Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A.Supreme Court of the United States · 2002

30 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