Greathouse

Greathouse v. City of Fresno

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaOctober 3, 20241:24-cv-00715California4,172 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JAMES GREATHOUSE, Case No. 1:24-cv-00715-JLT-BAM Plaintiff, SCREENING ORDER GRANTING

PLAINTIFF LEAVE TO FILE AMENDED

v. COMPLAINT CITY OF FRESNO, et al., (Doc. 4) Defendants. THIRTY-DAY DEADLINE 16 Plaintiff James Greathouse is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff’s signed complaint, filed on July 1, 2024, is currently before the Court for screening. (Doc. 4.) I. Screening Requirement and Standard The Court screens complaints brought by persons proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). Plaintiff’s complaint, or any portion thereof, is subject to dismissal if it is frivolous or malicious, if it fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or if it seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). A complaint must contain “a short…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.