Walker

Walker v. Police Chief

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMarch 17, 20201:19-cv-01546California5,989 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

I. INTRODUCTION

18 Plaintiff Harold Walker, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed a civil rights complaint against the City of Fresno, eight officers of the Fresno Police Department and three employees of Grocery Outlet on October 31, 2019. (Doc. 1.) In his original Complaint, attempted to plead claims for “making false statement[s] to police,” false arrest, “false prosecution,” excessive force, and municipal liability in violation of his Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights and rights under the California Constitution. (Id. at 5–7.) On December 12, 2019, the Complaint was screened and the undersigned found that Plaintiff’s Complaint failed to state a cognizable federal claim. (Doc. 5.) Plaintiff was provided with the applicable legal standards so that he could determine if he would like to pursue his case and was granted twenty-one (21) days leave to file an amended complaint curing the pleading deficiencies identified in the order. (Id.) After the Court granted an extension of time (see Doc. 8), Plaintiff filed his First Amended Complaint on January 30, 2020. (Doc. 10 (“First Am. Compl.”).)…

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.