(PS) Morris v. Solano County HSS Behavioral Health Divison

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaOctober 24, 20242:24-cv-01329California4,548 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 MARQUETTAH MORRIS, No. 2:24-cv-01329-DJC-CKD (PS) Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER

SOLANO COUNTY HEALTH AND

SOCIAL SERVICES BEHAVIORAL HEALTH DIVISION, et al., 16 Defendants. 17 Plaintiff Marquettah Morris proceeds pro se, and this matter is referred to the undersigned by Local Rule 302(c)(21). See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Plaintiff’s second amended complaint (“SAC”) is before the court for screening. Liberally construed, the SAC states claims under Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) against plaintiff’s former employer. The SAC does not state a Title VII pregnancy discrimination claim and does not state a claim against the union defendant. Plaintiff may proceed on the complaint as screened with claims under the ADA against her former employer, or plaintiff may file a further amended complaint to be screened by the court. Plaintiff must respond to this order as set forth below. I. SCREENING REQUIREMENT Pursuant to 28 U.S.C.…

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.