Costello

(PS) Van den Heuvel v. Costello

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaApril 21, 20232:23-cv-00253California2,734 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JEAN MARC VAN DEN HEUVEL, No. 2:23–cv–253-KJN PS Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING IFP REQUEST AND

GRANTING LEAVE TO AMEND

v. (ECF No. 2.) MIA COSTELLO, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff Jean Marc Van den Heuvel, who is proceeding without counsel in this action, requests leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). (ECF No. 2.) See 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Plaintiff’s affidavit makes the required showing, and so plaintiff’s request is granted. However, the determination that a plaintiff may proceed without payment of fees does not complete the inquiry. Under the IFP statute, the court must screen the complaint and dismiss any claims that are “frivolous or malicious,” fail to state a claim on which relief may be granted, or seek monetary relief against an immune defendant. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). Further, the federal court has an independent duty to ensure it has subject matter jurisdiction in the case. See United Investors Life Ins. Co. v. Waddell &…

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.