Lizarraga

(PC) McDaniel v. Lizarraga

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaOctober 15, 20202:19-cv-01136California8,595 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3

4 5

6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JOSEPH LEON MCDANIEL, No. 2:19-cv-1136 JAM KJN P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. 14 JOE LIZARRAGA, et al., ORDER AND FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding through counsel, in this civil rights action filed 18 under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. At present, four motions to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil 19 Procedure 12(b)(6) are pending as to six defendants, represented by four different lawyers. As 20 discussed below, the undersigned recommends that the motions of defendants Toralba, Martinez, 21 Dr. Galang, and Dr. Hawkins be granted on statute of limitations grounds; that defendant 22 Lizarraga’s motion be granted with leave to amend, and that defendant Micael’s motion be 23 denied. 24 The Verified Complaint 25 This case proceeds on plaintiff’s original complaint alleging the following. At all times 26 relevant herein, plaintiff was incarcerated at Mule Creek State Prison (“MCSP”). Plaintiff names 27 as…

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.