Whisnand

(PC) Hearns v. Whisnand

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaOctober 30, 20201:20-cv-00313California4,076 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1

2 3

4

5

6

7

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

11 CLARENCE L. HEARNS, e t al., CASE NO. 1:20-cv-0313 JLT (PC) 12 Plaintiffs, ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFFS TO

SUBMIT A RESPONSE

13 v. 14 ANDREW WHISNAND, et al., (Doc. 1)

15 Defendants.

FOURTEEN-DAY DEADLINE

16 Clarence L. Hearns and Curtis Boyd governmental employees and/or entities violated their 17 constitutional rights.1 (Doc. 1.) Generally, the Court is required to screen complaints brought by 18 inmates seeking relief against a governmental entity or an officer or employee of a governmental 19 entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The Court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner 20 has raised claims that are legally “frivolous or malicious,” that fail to state a claim upon which relief 21 may be granted, or that seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 22 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1), (2). “Notwithstanding any filing fee, or any portion thereof, that may have 23 been paid, the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that…

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.