Tamara King v. State of California

King v. State of California · United States District Court for the Eastern District of California · June 5, 2025 · No. 2:25-cv-1510-DJC-JDP (PS)

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California dismissed Tamara King's complaint against the State of California for failure to state a claim. The court granted leave to amend, granted in forma pauperis status, and ordered plaintiff to file an amended complaint or notice of voluntary dismissal within thirty days.

Holdings

  1. The complaint failed to state a claim because it did not identify specific claims or allege sufficient facts concerning the named defendant's involvement in the alleged violations.
  2. A federal court must screen an in forma pauperis complaint and dismiss any portion that is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim, or seeks monetary relief from an immune defendant; the complaint was dismissed under the failure-to-state-a-claim ground.
  3. The complaint was dismissed with leave to amend, and plaintiff was given thirty days to file a complete amended complaint or a notice of voluntary dismissal.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the complaint stated a plausible claim for relief under the federal pleading standards.
  2. Whether the complaint should be dismissed under the in forma pauperis screening statute for failure to state a claim.
  3. Whether plaintiff should be granted leave to amend.

Disposition

dismissed

Cases Cited (10)

  • Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)(followed)
  • Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678-79 (2009)(followed)
  • Kobold v. Good Samaritan Reg’l Med. Ctr., 832 F.3d 1024, 1038 (9th Cir. 2016)(followed)
  • Nagrampa v. MailCoups, Inc., 469 F.3d 1257, 1264 n.2 (9th Cir. 2006) (en banc)(followed)
  • Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972) (per curiam)(followed)
  • Hayes v. Idaho Corr. Ctr., 849 F.3d 1204, 1208 (9th Cir. 2017)(followed)
  • Bruns v. Nat’l Credit Union Admin., 122 F.3d 1251, 1257 (9th Cir. 1997)(followed)
  • Ivey v. Bd. of Regents, 673 F.2d 266, 268 (9th Cir. 1982)(followed)
  • Jones v. Cmty. Redev. Agency, 733 F.2d 646, 649 (9th Cir. 1984)(followed)
  • Lacey v. Maricopa Cnty., 693 F.3d 896, 907 n.1 (9th Cir. 2012) (en banc)(followed)

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…