Donald Urrutia v. Harrisburg County Police Dept. Sean McCormack Asst. D.A. Denis Thomason, Donald Urrutia

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that the Rule 4(m) period “is suspended until the district judge authorizes issuance of the summons and service of the . . . complaint”
• holding that the period for satisfying the relation-back requirements does not begin to run until after screening
• concluding that the Rule 4(m) period “is suspended until the district judge authorizes issuance of the summons and service of the . . . complaint”
• holding that Rule 4(m)’s service period for in forma pauperis plaintiffs is tolled until the court authorizes service of amended complaint
• holding that “once a plaintiff submits an in forma pauperis complaint within the time provided by the statute of limitations, and after the § 1915(a) in forma pauperis determination is made, the [90] day [relation back] period of Rule 15(c)(3
• noting that deliberate indifference standard should apply to claims that prison officials failed to protect inmate from violent attack whether or not the attack comes from another inmate

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).