Law

Law v. Mooney

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaApril 15, 20244:23-cv-05287California1,681 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 CARLOS GILBERT LAW, Case No. 23-cv-05287-JST

Plaintiff,

ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S SECOND

v. AMENDED COMPLAINT

STAR MOONEY, et al., Re: ECF No. 12 Defendants.

12 Before the Court for screening is Plaintiff Carlos Gilbert Law’s second amended complaint (“SAC”). ECF No. 12. The court finds that the SAC sufficiently states a claim for the purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). I. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Plaintiff filed a complaint on October 17, 2023, alleging that San Francisco Police Department (“SFPD”) Officers—Defendants Balingit, Star Mooney, and Russack arrested him without probable cause, and in violation of his Fourth Amendment rights. ECF No. 1 at 2. He brought Section 1983 claims against Defendants in their individual and official capacities. Id. On November 13, 2023, the Court issued an order screening the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). The Court found that the complaint sufficiently stated a claim…

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.