Hemphill

Hemphill v. Farr

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJune 3, 20201:19-cv-01119California3,070 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 MONTREAL D. HEMPHILL, Case No. 1:19-cv-01119-AWI-EPG 10 Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS,

RECOMMENDING THAT THIS ACTION

PROCEED ON PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS

AGAINST DEFENDANT PALMER FOR

VIOLATION OF PLAINTIFF’S FIRST v. AMENDMENT RIGHT TO FREE EXERCISE OF RELIGION AND FOR VIOLATION OF

THE RELIGIOUS LAND USE AND

INSTITUTIONALIZED PERSONS ACT OF

2000, AND THAT ALL OTHER CLAIMS BE

CITY OF HANFORD POILCE DISMISSED

DEPARTMENT, et al.

OBJECTIONS, IF ANY, DUE WITHIN

Defendants. TWENTY-ONE (21) DAYS

(ECF No. 6) 20 Plaintiff, Montreal D. Hemphill (“Plaintiff”), is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, 21 in this civil rights action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed the complaint commencing this lawsuit on August 15, 2019. (ECF No. 1). The Court issued a…

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.