Kernan

(PC) Walker v. Kernan

Bad Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaAugust 9, 20192:17-cv-01764California3,863 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 G. DANIEL WALKER, No. 2:17-cv-1764 KJM DB P Plaintiff, v. ORDER SCOTT KERNAN, et al., Defendants. 14 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff claims defendants conspired to retaliate against him because he named them as defendants in lawsuits. Presently before the court is plaintiff’s second amended complaint (ECF No. 22) for screening. For the reasons set forth below, the court will give plaintiff the option to proceed with the second amended complaint as screened, or file an amended complaint. BACKGROUND This action was initially filed in the Sacramento County Superior Court. Defendants removed the case to federal court and requested the court screen the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. (ECF No. 3.) The court screened the complaint and found it violated Federal Rule of Civil Procedure…

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.