Legal Opinion

Alejandro v. State of California

District Court, District of Columbia

Decided May 6, 2022No. Civil Action No. 2022-0899Published

1Opinion of the Court

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA OMAR MEDINA ALEJANDRO, 1 ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 22-cv-00899 (UNA) ) ) STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ) ) Defendant. ) MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter is before the Court on its initial review of plaintiff’s pro se complaint (“Compl.”), ECF No. 1, application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (also “IFP”), ECF No. 2, and motion for emergency relief (“Mot.”), ECF No. 3. Pro se litigants must comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Jarrell v. Tisch,

656 F. Supp. 237, 239

(D.D.C. 1987). Rule 8(a) of the Federal Rules of…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  2. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  3. Neitzke v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  4. Denton v. HernandezSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  5. Hagans v. LavineSupreme Court of the United States · 1974

12 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