IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
February 23, 2011
AARON STRIBLING, PLAINTIFF,
BORTOLEMEDI, ET AL., DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gregory G. Hollows United States Magistrate Judge
Plaintiff is a California prisoner proceeding pro se with an action for violation of civil rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. In his complaint, plaintiff alleges he was subjected to excessive force by defendant Bortolemedi in violation of the Eighth Amendment. On February 1, 2011, the court ordered plaintiff to show cause why defendant "CSP Corrections" should not be dismissed based on Eleventh Amendment Grounds. Plaintiff filed his response on February 11, 2011.
Assuming plaintiff is referring to either California State Prison, Sacramento (where he is housed) or the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, petitioner may not sue either entity as the Eleventh Amendment serves as a bar to suits brought by private parties against a state or state agency unless the state or the agency consents to such suit. See Quern v. Jordan, 440 U.S. 332 (1979); Alabama v. Pugh, 438 U.S. 781 (1978)( per curiam);
Krainski v. Nevada etc., 616 F.3d 963, 967 (9th Cir. 2010). In the instant case, the State of California has not consented to suit and petitioner fails to provide any adequate reason in his response to the court's order to show cause why "CSP Corrections" should remain as a defendant.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant "CSP Corrections" is dismissed.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.