Legal Opinion

Elijah Lee Jackson v. Anthony Bell

District Court, E.D. California

Decided September 18, 2025No. 2:21-cv-01814Unknown

1Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ELIJAH LEE JACKSON, No. 2:21-CV-1814-KJM-DMC-P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 ANTHONY BELL, 15 Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 18 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the Court is Defendant’s unopposed motion to dismiss. See 19 ECF No. 34. 20 In considering a motion to dismiss, the Court must accept all allegations of 21 material fact in the complaint as true. See Erickson v. Pardus,

551 U.S. 89, 93-94

(2007).…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  2. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  3. Erickson v. PardusSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  4. Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  5. Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972

17 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