From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pelton v. Amador Cnty.

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Dec 13, 2021
2:21-CV-1968-DMC-P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 13, 2021)

Opinion

2:21-CV-1968-DMC-P

12-13-2021

SEAN MICHAEL PELTON, Plaintiff, v. AMADOR COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, Defendant.


ORDER

DENNIS M. COTA, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.

Plaintiff, a pre-trial detainee proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the Court are Plaintiff's motions for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, ECF Nos. 2 and 7. Plaintiff's complaint, and service thereof by the United States Marshal if appropriate, will be addressed separately. Plaintiff has submitted the affidavit required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) showing that Plaintiff is unable to prepay fees and costs or give security therefor.

The Court erroneously referred to Plaintiff as a “prisoner” in its prior order.

Because Plaintiff is a pre-trial detainee and not a prisoner serving a sentence following a criminal conviction, the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA) is inapplicable. Therefore, the Court's December 1, 2021, order requiring Plaintiff to submit an application to proceed in forma pauperis consistent with the fee provisions of the PLRA, will be vacated as having been issued in error.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff s motions for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, ECF Nos. 2 and 7, are granted; and

2. The Court's December 1, 2021, order is vacated as having been issued in error.


Summaries of

Pelton v. Amador Cnty.

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Dec 13, 2021
2:21-CV-1968-DMC-P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 13, 2021)
Case details for

Pelton v. Amador Cnty.

Case Details

Full title:SEAN MICHAEL PELTON, Plaintiff, v. AMADOR COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Dec 13, 2021

Citations

2:21-CV-1968-DMC-P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 13, 2021)