Trenton

Trenton v. Carmax, Inc

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaApril 8, 20223:21-cv-01993California1,035 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 || JOSEPH AMAZIAH TRENTON, Case No.: 21cv1993-JO-MSB Plaintt,| ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S 12 || v. MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION |} CARMAX, INC. et. al., Defendants. 15 Plaintiff sought reconsideration of the Court’s Oder denying Plaintiff's application 17 || to proceed in forma pauperis. For the reasons stated below, the Court GRANTS □□□□□□□□□□□ ||request for reconsideration [Dkt. 7] and GRANTS Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma 19 || pauperis [Dkt. 2]. I. BACKGROUND Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed a complaint on November 26, 2021, alleging false ||imprisonment and negligent failure to train employees and moved to proceed in forma 23 || pauperis (“IFP”). Dkts. 1, 2. On November 30, 2021, U.S. District Judge Bencivengo 24 || denied Plaintiff s IFP application without prejudice on the grounds that his affidavit lacked credibility regarding income and…

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.