Legal Opinion
Trenton v. Carmax, Inc
District Court, S.D. California
Decided April 8, 2022No. 3:21-cv-01993Unknown
1Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 || JOSEPH AMAZIAH TRENTON, Case No.: 21cv1993-JO-MSB Plaintt,| ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S 12 || v. MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION 13 |} CARMAX, INC. et. al., 14 Defendants. 15 16 Plaintiff sought reconsideration of the Court’s Oder denying Plaintiff's application 17 || to proceed in forma pauperis. For the reasons stated below, the Court GRANTS □□□□□□□□□□□ 18 ||request for reconsideration [Dkt. 7] and GRANTS Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma 19 || pauperis [Dkt. 2]. 20 I. BACKGROUND 21 Plaintiff, proceeding pro…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Maria Escobedo v. Apple American GroupCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2015
- Kingvision Pay-Per-View Ltd. v. Lake Alice BarCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999
- Fidelity Federal Bank, Fsb, a Federally Chartered Savings Bank v. Durga Ma Corporation, a New Jersey CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004
- Straw v. BowenCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
- Wayne Merkley v. State of IdahoCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2015