Pretty v. Efird et al, No. 3:2019cv00024 - Document 28 (E.D. Va. 2019)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge Henry E. Hudson on 09/26/2019. Copy mailed to Plaintiff. (walk, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Pretty v. Efird et al Doc. 28 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA I Richmond Division E SEP 2 6 2019 ERIC PRETTY, CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT COURT RICHMOND, VA Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 3:19CV24-HEH V. MEGHAN F. CAMPBELL, et al.. Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION (Dismissing With Prejudice 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Action) Eric Pretty, a Virginia inmate proceeding pro se and informa pauperis, filed this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. By Memorandum Order entered on July 22, 2019, the Court directed Pretty to file a second particularized complaint within fourteen (14) days of the date of entry thereof. After receiving two extensions, Pretty filed his Particularized Complaint. (ECF No. 27.) The matter is before the Court for evaluation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2) and 1915A. 1. PRELIMINARY REVIEW Pursuant to the Prison Litigation Reform Act ("PLRA"), this Court mustdismiss any action filed by a prisoner if the Court determines the action (1) "is frivolous" or (2) "fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted." 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2); see also 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. The first standard includes claims premised upon "'an indisputably meritless legal theory,'" or claims where the '"factual contentions are clearly baseless.'" Clay V. Yales, 809 F. Supp. 417,427 (E.D. Va. 1992) (quoting Neitzke v. Williams, 490 Dockets.Justia.com
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
