Legal Opinion
Wescott v. Daniel
District Court, N.D. California
Decided April 13, 2022No. 3:21-cv-10011Unknown
1Opinion
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 CARL WESCOTT, Case No. 21-cv-10011-JCS 8 Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY 9 v. COMPLAINT SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED 10 CRAIG DANIEL, et al., Re: Dkt. No. 1 Defendants. 11 12 13 I. INTRODUCTION 14 The Court previously granted an application by Plaintiff Carl Wescott, pro se, to proceed 15 in forma pauperis, see dkt. 4,1 and now reviews the sufficiency of Wescott’s complaint against 16 Defendants Craig Daniel; Matthew Gluck; Gordon Atkinson; Justin Sowa; and Gluck Daniel, LLP 17 (the “Firm”) under 28 U.S.C. §…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Michael Henry Ferdik v. Joe Bonzelet, SheriffCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1992
- Hebbe v. PlilerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010
- Javiad Akhtar v. J. MesaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
- Parks School of Business, Inc., Dba Parks College, a New Mexico Corporation v. Fife Symington Roy A. Nicholson Sally HeinCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1995
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.