Legal Opinion

(PC) Correa v. Bravdrick

District Court, E.D. California

Decided August 26, 2022No. 1:19-cv-00369Unknown

1Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ANGELO CORREA, No. 1:19-cv-00369-ADA-BAK (GSA) (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO COMPEL 13 v. (Doc. 87) 14 BRAUDRICK, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff Angelo Correa is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights 18 action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 19 I. INTRODUCTION 20 On August 15, 2022, Plaintiff filed a “Motion for an Order Compelling Discovery.” (Doc. 21 87.) Plaintiff contends Defendants Braudrick, Maddux and Salinas should be compelled to 22 “answer fully”…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Landis v. North American Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1936
  2. Hallett v. MorganCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
  3. Faigin v. Kelly & CarucciCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1999
  4. In re Sulfuric Acid Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 2005
  5. KST Data, Inc. v. DXC Tech. Co.District Court, C.D. California · 2018

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

Powered by the Exa API