(PC) Pangborn v. CDCR
District Court, E.D. California
1Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DAVID JAMES PANGBORN, No. 2:22-cv-1985 TLN DB P 12 Plaintiff, 13 CDCR, et al.. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 Defendants. 15 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action under
42 U.S.C. § 17
1983. Defendants removed this case from state court and paid the filing fee. Before the court is 18 defendants’ request for screening of plaintiff’s complaint. That request will be granted. For the 19 reasons set forth below, this court finds plaintiff has stated cognizable…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Servs.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Neitzke v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Pennhurst State School and Hospital v. HaldermanSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.