Liddell

(PC) Howell v. Liddell

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaFebruary 27, 20202:19-cv-00578California1,720 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 KAREEM J. HOWELL, No. 2:19-cv-0578 TLN KJN P Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS M. LIDDELL, et al., Defendants. 16 I. Introduction Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se. This action proceeds on plaintiff’s claims that defendants M. Liddell, R. Anderson, and R. Cross retaliated against plaintiff because he filed a civil rights complaint and a staff complaint at the prison level in violation of the First Amendment. (See ECF No. 6 at 2.) On January 24, 2020, plaintiff filed a motion for summary judgment seeking partial liability on plaintiff’s First Amendment retaliation claims, and arguing that plaintiff is excused from exhausting his administrative remedies because defendants prevented plaintiff from exhausting them. On February 12, 2020, defendants filed an opposition

In addition, plaintiff declared under penalty of perjury that his administrative remedies were 26 rendered unavailable by the…

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.