Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-02128/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-02128-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JAMES ARTHUR HAROLSON,

NO. CIV. S-04-2128 LKK/PAN P

Plaintiff,

v. O R D E R

JIM POPE, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this

civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The

matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant

to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local General Order No. 262. 

This court has reviewed the magistrate judge’s findings and

recommendations. The magistrate judge concluded without any

analysis or citations that “[t]he federal right of access to the

courts does not extend to small claims actions” and recommended

that the action be dismissed for failure to state a claim. I

cannot agree. 

Case 2:04-cv-02128-LKK -PAN Document 8 Filed 05/10/05 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

While it appears that the Ninth Circuit has not ruled on this

precise issue (whether the right of access to courts includes

access to small claims courts), other courts have held that a

prisoner’s reasonable access to the courts must include access in

general civil legal matters including but not limited to divorce

and small claims courts. See, e.g., Corpus v. Estelle, 551 F.2d

68, 70 (5th Cir. 1977). This matter is remanded to the magistrate

judge for further proceedings consistent with this order. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: May 9, 2005.

/s/Lawrence K. Karlton 

LAWRENCE K. KARLTON

SENIOR JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Case 2:04-cv-02128-LKK -PAN Document 8 Filed 05/10/05 Page 2 of 2