Hill

(PC) Weisner v. Hill

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJune 14, 20232:21-cv-02275California5,572 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 FRANKIE WEISNER, No. 2:21-CV-2275-DAD-DMC-P Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RICK HILL, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the Court is Defendants’ motion to dismiss. See ECF No. 31. Plaintiff has filed an opposition. See ECF No. 32. Defendants have filed a reply. See ECF No. 33. In considering a motion to dismiss, the Court must accept all allegations of material fact in the complaint as true. See Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 93-94 (2007). The Court must also construe the alleged facts in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. See Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 236 (1974); see also Hosp. Bldg. Co. v. Rex Hosp. Trustees, 425 U.S. 738, 740 (1976); Barnett v. Centoni, 31 F.3d 813, 816 (9th Cir. 1994) (per curiam). All ambiguities or doubts must also be resolved in the…

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.