Legal Opinion

(PC) Casey v. Docanto

District Court, E.D. California

Decided May 5, 2020No. 1:20-cv-00420Unknown

1Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JAMES ARTHUR CASEY, ) Case No.: 1:20-cv-00420-SAB (PC) ) 12 Plaintiff, ) ) ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO 13 v. ) RANDOMLY ASSIGN A DISTRICT JUDGE TO THIS ACTION 14 M. DOCANTO, et al., ) ) FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION 15 Defendants. ) RECOMMENDING DISMISSAL OF ACTION ) FOR FAILURE TO STATE A COGNIZABLE 16 ) CLAIM FOR RELIEF ) 17 ) [ECF No. 12] 18 Plaintiff James Arthur Casey is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights 19 action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 20 Currently before the Court…

2Cases cited34 opinions

  1. Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  2. Estelle v. GambleSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  3. Lopez v. SmithCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
  4. Hudson v. McMillianSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  5. J. Wilkerson v. B. WheelerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014

29 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