Legal Opinion
(PC) Law v. Austin
District Court, E.D. California
Decided January 23, 2020No. 2:17-cv-02060Unknown
1Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CARLOS GILBERT LAW, No. 2:17-cv-2060 JAM AC P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER and 14 LORI W. AUSTIN, et al., FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 15 Defendants. 16 17 I. Introduction 18 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with this civil rights 19 action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The case proceeds on the Operative First Amended Complaint 20 docketed September 13, 2019.1 ECF No. 23. On November 6, 2019, defendants filed a motion to 21 revoke plaintiff’s in forma pauperis (IFP) status…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Gilbert B. Martinez v. Eddie Ylst, Superintendent, California Medical Facility SouthCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1991
- Polk County v. DodsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Andrews v. CervantesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
- Sprewell v. Golden State WarriorsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001
- Michael Williams v. Audrey KingCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2017
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.