Scott

Scott v. Hill

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaMay 27, 20253:24-cv-02400California5,294 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ROBERT SCOTT, Case No.: 3:24-cv-2400-WQH-MSB

CDCR #AK5483,

ORDER: (1) GRANTING MOTION

Plaintiff, TO PROCEED IN FORMA vs. PAUPERIS [ECF No. 2];

(2) DISMISSING COMPLAINT FOR

JAMES HILL, JOHN/JANE DOE, GAIL FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM

MESSLER, DAVID GULDSETH, PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C.

DAVID CLAYTON, JAMES E. BATES, §§ 1915(e)(2)(B) AND 1915A(b)

MARK JACOBSON, AMIR

MOHAMED, PEYMAN SHAKIBA,

Defendants. 20 I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Robert Scott (“Plaintiff” or “Scott”), a state inmate proceeding pro se, has filed a civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, along with a motion to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). See ECF Nos. 1, 2. In his Complaint, Scott alleges Defendants violated his Eighth Amendment right to adequate medical care by delaying total knee replacement surgery for both knees, subsequently…

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.