(PC) Allen v. State of California

District Court, E.D. California·Decided March 28, 2023·No. 1:23-cv-00094·Unknown

Opinion

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA DAVID ALLEN Case No. 1:23-cv-00094-HBK (PC) Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION J TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS , (Doc. No. 2) STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al., Defendants. Plaintiff, who is detained at Coalinga State Hospital, filed a pro se 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint on January 23, 2023. (Doc. No. 1). Plaintiff submits a declaration regarding his financial circumstances in support of his request to proceed in this action in forma pauperis. (Doc. No. 14). That declaration satisfies the requirements under § 1915. Plaintiff is a civil detainee, not a prisoner within the Prison Litigation Reform Act, and is not subject to payment of the filing fee under § 1915(a)(2). Page v. Torrey, 201 F.3d 1136, 1140 (9th Cir. 2000). Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED: Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. No. 2) is GRANTED. Dated: _ March 28, 2023 Mihaw. Wh. foareh Zaskth HELENA M. BARCH-KUCHTA 38 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

(PC) Allen v. State of California, (E.D. Cal. 2023).

(PC) Allen v. State of California ((PC) Allen v. State of California) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Page v. Torrey
201 F.3d 1136 (Ninth Circuit, 2000)