Rouse
Rouse v. Abernathy
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 XEZAKIA ROUSE, Case No. 21-cv-05708-JSC
Plaintiff,
SCREENING ORDER PURSUANT TO
v. 28 U.S.C. § 1915
RONALD HAYES ABERNATHY, Re: Dkt. No. 12 Defendant.
12 Upon review of Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, the Court determined that Plaintiff’s Section 1983 claim was sufficient but his legal malpractice claim did not contain a short and plain statement of the claim and the grounds upon which it rests, as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8. (Dkt. No. 11; see Dkt. No. 7.) The Court directed Plaintiff to file a Second Amended Complaint that either: (1) includes allegations to further support the legal malpractice claim, if he wishes to proceed with the claim, or (2) eliminates the legal malpractice claim. (Dkt. No. 11 at 5.) Plaintiff filed an “amendment of legal malpractice claim.” (Dkt. No. 12 at 1.) The Court will construe this as an addendum to the First Amended Complaint,…