Legal Opinion
(PC) Paschall v. Johal
District Court, E.D. California
Decided August 22, 2025No. 1:24-cv-00154Unknown
1Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 LAMAR PASCHALL, Case No.: 1:24-cv-00154-JLT-SKO 12 Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO DISMISS JANE DOE AND JOHN DOE 13 v. DEFENDANTS 14 AMANDEEP JOHAL, et al., 14-DAY OBJECTION DEADLINE 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff Lamar Paschall is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights 18 action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action proceeds on Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment 19 deliberate indifference to serious medical needs claims against Defendants Fu, Smith, Sinclair, 20 Jane Doe, and…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Sandin v. ConnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- J. Wilkerson v. B. WheelerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
- Andrew John Walker, Plaintiff-Appellant-Cross-Appellee v. George W. Sumner, Defendants-Appellees-Cross-AppellantsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1994
- Ticketmaster L.L.C. v. Prestige Entm't W., Inc.District Court, C.D. California · 2018
- Williby v. State of CaliforniaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008