Legal Opinion

(PC) Kuykendall v. Superior Court of CA

District Court, E.D. California

Decided November 10, 2020No. 2:20-cv-01590Unknown

1Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RONALD KUYKENDALL, II, No. 2:20-cv-1590 KJN P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a pretrial detainee, proceeding pro se. Plaintiff seeks relief pursuant to 42 18 U.S.C. § 1983, and has requested leave to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 19 § 1915. This proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 302 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 20 § 636(b)(1). 21 Plaintiff submitted a declaration that makes the showing required by 28…

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  2. Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Servs.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
  3. Erickson v. PardusSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  4. Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  5. Neitzke v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1989

24 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