Tuck

Tuck v. Graves

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaJune 22, 20223:21-cv-02086California1,734 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ROY TUCK, Case No.: 21cv2086-JO-JLB

Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO

v. PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS

AND DIRECTING U.S. MARSHAL

JONATHON GRAVES; SAMUEL

TO EFFECT SERVICE OF

ROBISON; COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO;

COMPLAINT AND SUMMONS and DOES 1 through 20, 16 Defendants. 17 18

20 Plaintiff Roy Tuck (“Plaintiff”), a non-prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a civil rights complaint against Defendants Jonathon Graves, Samuel Robison, the County of San Diego, and Does 1 through 20 (collectively, “Defendants”). Dkt. 1 (“Complaint” or “Compl.”). Plaintiff filed a concurrent motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). Dkt. 2. For the reasons set forth below, the IFP motion is GRANTED. I. Motion to Proceed IFP Plaintiff has not prepaid the civil filing fee and instead requested to proceed IFP, claiming an inability to pay. A plaintiff instituting any civil action,…

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.