Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Riseley v. Warden

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


August 20, 2009

THOMAS F. RISELEY, PLAINTIFF,
v.
WARDEN, MULE CREEK STATE PRISON, DEFENDANT.

ORDER

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 72-302 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). On July 6, 2009, plaintiff filed a consent to proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).

By order filed July 10, 2009, this action was dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 on the ground that plaintiff's sole allegation is that his property was lost and that his remedy lies in the provisions of California Government Code, §§ 900, et seq., California's state remedy for tort claims against public officials. On July 16, 2009, plaintiff filed a motion for review of the July 10, 2009 order, accompanied by documents from plaintiff's use of the prison administrative grievance procedure. Review of plaintiff's motion and the documents filed in support thereof confirms the finding in this court's July 10, 2009 order that plaintiff's remedy lies, if at all, in the state tort system.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's July 16, 2009 request for review is granted and, upon review, this court's July 10, 2009 order is confirmed.

20090820

© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.