Turner

Turner v. Rose, Klein & Marias

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaSeptember 3, 20233:23-cv-03544California2,404 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA San Francisco Division TERRANCE TURNER, et al., Case No. 23-cv-03544-LB

Plaintiffs, SCREENING ORDER v. Re: ECF No.

ROSE, KLEIN & MARIAS, et al., Defendants. 16 INTRODUCTION The plaintiffs Terrance Turner and Christopher Martinez, who represent themselves and are proceeding in forma pauperis, sued the law firm Rose, Klein & Marias, among others, for failing to sue on behalf of Mr. Martinez to obtain workers’ compensation benefits. The plaintiffs claim violations of various federal statutes — including conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. §§ 241 and 371 and fraud under 18 U.S.C. §§ 1031–32 and 1038–40 — breach of contract, and negligence.1 Before directing the United States Marshal to serve the defendants with the complaint, the court must screen it for minimal legal viability. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). The plaintiffs have not plausibly pleaded any claims and Mr. Turner…

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.