From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Smith v. Las Vegas Metro. Police Dep't

United States District Court, District of Nevada
Feb 23, 2023
2:23-cv-00092-JAD-NJK (D. Nev. Feb. 23, 2023)

Opinion

2:23-cv-00092-JAD-NJK

02-23-2023

Mary Smith on behalf of James Perea, Plaintiff v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, et al., Defendants


ORDER

Plaintiff Mary Smith, who is the special administrator of the estate of James Perea, brings this counseled civil-rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Smith paid the $402 filing fee for a civil action. Although the complaint alleges conditions-of-confinement violations and wrongful death within the Clark County Detention Center, this case is not subject to the screening requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 1915, so it will now proceed to the normal litigation track.

ECF No. 4 (corrected image of complaint).

ECF No. 8.

See generally 28 U.S.C. § 1915A (screening applies when a prisoner files a complaint); see Olivas v. Nevada ex rel. Dep't of Corr., 856 F.3d 1281, 1282 (9th Cir. 2017) (holding that “28 U.S.C. § 1915A applies only to claims brought by individuals incarcerated at the time they file their complaints”); see Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1126, 1129 (9th Cir. 2000) (recognizing that screening under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) applies to actions filed in forma pauperis whether or not the plaintiff is incarcerated).


Summaries of

Smith v. Las Vegas Metro. Police Dep't

United States District Court, District of Nevada
Feb 23, 2023
2:23-cv-00092-JAD-NJK (D. Nev. Feb. 23, 2023)
Case details for

Smith v. Las Vegas Metro. Police Dep't

Case Details

Full title:Mary Smith on behalf of James Perea, Plaintiff v. Las Vegas Metropolitan…

Court:United States District Court, District of Nevada

Date published: Feb 23, 2023

Citations

2:23-cv-00092-JAD-NJK (D. Nev. Feb. 23, 2023)