Clendenin

(PC) Hoch v. Clendenin

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMay 1, 20251:23-cv-00796California1,102 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 CORY HOCH, 1:23-cv-00796-KES-SKO Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

v. AND GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION

FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

STEPHANIE CLENDENIN, et al., Docs. 27, 33 Defendants.

16 17 18 Plaintiff is a civil detainee proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in a civil rights action 19 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter was referred to a United States magistrate judge 20 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 21 Plaintiff, who suffers from mobility disabilities, initiated this action on May 24, 2023, 22 alleging defendants violated the ADA, the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, 23 and the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by restricting his access to vocational 24 job and education assignments. Doc. 1. The assigned magistrate judge screened the complaint 25 and found that plaintiff had stated a claim. Doc. 9. On September 26, 2024, defendants moved 26 for summary…

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.