Legal Opinion

Tate v. Werner

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided May 16, 1975No. Civ. A. No. 74-1418PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION AND ORDER

FOGEL, District Judge.

Monserrate Zapata, one of the two named plaintiffs in this civil rights class action, has filed a pro se motion entitled “Motion to Present Incidental to Complaint”. For the reasons set forth in this memorandum, we will dismiss the motion with prejudice.

The class action out of which this motion springs was filed pro se and in forma pauperis by Otis Tate and Mon-serrate Zapata, two inmates of the State Correctional Institution at Graterford. The complaint alleges, First: that the law library at the prison was inadequate and in violation of the standards…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Joseph Gaito v. Honorable Henry Ellenbogen, Honorable J. Frank Graff, Honorable William C. Sennett, Honorable Robert W. Duggan and A. T. PrasseCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1970
  2. The Robin GoodfellowDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 1927
  3. Watts v. CopelandSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1933

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Tate v. WernerCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1976
  2. Zapata, Appeal OfCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1976

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API