Briggs

Briggs v. Baker

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaAugust 14, 20203:20-cv-04243California762 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

INTRODUCTION

17 Pro se plaintiff Ronnie Briggs filed a civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. 1983 18 complaining about everything from assault, fabrication of evidence, kidnapping, robbery, and 19 theft while being confined at an unspecified facility. He is granted leave to proceed in forma 20 pauperis in a separate order. For the reasons discussed below, the complaint is DISMISSED 21 without prejudice.

DISCUSSION

23 In cases in which a plaintiff seeks to proceed without the prepayment of the required filing 24 fee and attendant fees for service of process, courts have long had the authority to dismiss in 25 forma pauperis complaints if satisfied that the claims asserted are frivolous, malicious, fail to state 26 a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seek monetary relief from a defendant who is 27 immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). Section 1915(e)(2)(B) applies equally to prisoner and non-prisoner in forma pauperis cases. See Newsome v. EEOC, 301 F.3d 227, 231–33 (5th Cir. 2002) (affirming dismissal of non-prisoner claims for frivolity and failure to state a claim under Section 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) & (ii)); Cieszkowska v. Gray…

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.