Russell

(PC) Foster v. Russell

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJuly 31, 20202:19-cv-02162California1,095 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 MICHAEL JOE FOSTER, Sr., No. 2:19-cv-2162-KJM-EFB P Plaintiff, v. ORDER ELLIOT, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is incarcerated in the Sacramento County Main Jail. He proceeds without counsel in this action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On April 22, 2020, the court screened plaintiff’s first amended complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A and found that he had not alleged which of the named defendants violated his rights. ECF No. 12 at 3. The court granted plaintiff leave to file a second amended complaint, which is now before the court for screening. I. Screening Requirement Federal courts must engage in a preliminary screening of cases in which prisoners seek redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The court must identify cognizable claims or dismiss the complaint, or any portion of the complaint, if the complaint “is frivolous, malicious, or…

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.