Schultz

(PC) Adkins v. Schultz

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaFebruary 26, 20252:23-cv-01654California3,619 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 DUPREE LAMONT ADKINS, No. 2:23-cv-1654 AC P Plaintiff, v. ORDER J. SCHULTZ, et al., Defendants. 15 Plaintiff is a state inmate who filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 without a lawyer. He has requested leave to proceed without paying the full filing fee for this action, under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Plaintiff has submitted a declaration showing that he cannot afford to pay the entire filing fee. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2). Accordingly, plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. Plaintiff has also filed a motion to exceed the twenty-five- page limit for e-filed complaints (ECF No. 3) and that request will be granted. I. Statutory Screening of Prisoner Complaints The court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against “a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). A

This means that plaintiff 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.