Cretchen-McCoy

(PS) Brick v. Cretchen-McCoy

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaNovember 8, 20242:23-cv-02621California1,289 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 CHRISTOPHER BRICK, Case No. 2:23-cv-2621-TLN-JDP (PS) Plaintiff, v. ORDER JENNIFER CRETCHEN-MCCOY, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff brings this action pro se, alleging that defendants violated his rights in various ways relating to child custody. ECF No. 1 at 6-9. As articulated, the complaint fails to put defendants on notice of the specific claims against them in compliance with federal rules. I will give plaintiff leave to amend to file an amended complaint that better explains his claims. I will also grant his application to proceed in forma pauperis, ECF No. 2, which makes the showing required by 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(a)(1) and (2). Screening and Pleading Requirements A federal court must screen the complaint of any claimant seeking permission to proceed in forma pauperis. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). The court must identify any cognizable claims and dismiss any portion of the complaint that is…

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.