Legal Opinion

Darius Heimer Gittens v. Ryan Pepper, et al.

District Court, D. New Jersey

Decided February 18, 2026No. 3:23-cv-17721Unknown

1Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY DARIUS HEIMER GITTENS, Plaintitt, Civil Action No. 23-17721 (MAS) (JTQ) OPINION RYAN PEPPER, et al., Defendants. SHIPP, District Judge This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff Darius Gittens’s second amended complaint (“SAC”).' (ECF No, 21.) As Plaintiff was previously granted in forma pauperis status, the Court is required to screen Plaintiffs amended complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) and dismiss any claim which is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim for relief, or seeks relief from an…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  2. Farmer v. BrennanSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  3. Heck v. HumphreySupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  4. Preiser v. RodriguezSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  5. Papasan v. AllainSupreme Court of the United States · 1986

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