Fredeluces

(PC) Hill v. Fredeluces

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJuly 11, 20252:25-cv-00749California1,651 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MICHAEL HILL, No. 2:25-cv-00749-EFB (PC) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 FEDELUCES, 15 Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff is a county jail detainee proceeding without counsel in an action brought pursuant 18 to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 302 pursuant to 28 19 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). In addition to filing a complaint, plaintiff has filed an application to proceed 20 in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. ECF No. 6. 21 I. Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis 22 Plaintiff’s application makes the showing required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1) and (2). 23 Accordingly, by separate order, the court directs the agency having custody of plaintiff to collect 24 and forward the appropriate monthly payments for the filing fee as set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 25 1915(b)(1) and (2). 26 //// 27 //// 28 //// 1 II. Screening Requirement and Standards 2 Federal courts must engage in a preliminary screening of cases in…

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.