Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Eugene Hamilton v. S. White

March 9, 2011

EUGENE HAMILTON, PLAINTIFF,
v.
S. WHITE, ET AL.,
DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: VICTOR B. Kenton United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER RE DISMISSAL OF FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO AMEND

Pro se prisoner Eugene Hamilton (hereinafter referred to as "Plaintiff") filed a Civil Rights Complaint Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983 on February 26, 2010, pursuant to the Court's Order re Leave to File Action Without Prepayment of Full Filing Fee. Plaintiff's original Complaint was 80 pages long, repetitive, rambling, and lists 19 causes of action against 74 Defendants.

On March 3, 2010, the action was transferred from United States Magistrate Judge Carolyn Turchin to United States Magistrate Judge Victor B. Kenton for further proceedings.

On December 17, 2010, the Court issued a Memorandum and Order dismissing Plaintiff's Complaint with leave to amend.

On January 10, 2011, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint.

The First Amended Complaint is 109 pages long, repetitive, rambling and lists twelve causes of action against 60 Defendants.

Plaintiff alleges multiple claims in the First Amended Complaint that are largely unrelated, except that Plaintiff contends that every alleged act by Defendants was also an act of retaliation against him. Plaintiff may not proceed in one action on a myriad of unrelated claims against different staff members. The controlling principle appears in Fed.R.Civ.P. 18(a): "A party asserting a claim, counterclaim, cross claim, or third-party claim, may join as independent or alternate claims, as many as it has against an opposing party." Thus, multiple claims against a single party are fine, but Claim A against Defendant One should not be joined with unrelated Claim B against Defendant Two. Unrelated claims against different defendants belong in different suits, not only to prevent the sort of morass a multiple claim multiple defendant suit produces, but also to ensure that prisoners pay the required filing fees for the Prison Litigation Reform Act ("PLRA") limits to three (3) the number of frivolous suits or appeals that any prisoner may file without prepayment of the required fees. 28 U.S.C. §1915(g); George v. Smith, 507 F.3d 605, 607 (7th Cir. 2007).

Here, Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint recites various encounters with prison officials, some of which are not related to others. Plaintiff will not be permitted to pursue unrelated claims in this action. In amending, Plaintiff should determine which related claims he wishes to pursue and re-allege those claims only.

PLAINTIFF'S ALLEGATIONS CONTAINED IN THE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

Plaintiff alleges on November 30, 2005, while imprisoned at Ironwood State Prison, he sustained an injury to his previously broken left ankle. (First Amended Complaint ["FAC"] at 20.) Plaintiff submitted a request seeking medical attention for his swollen left ankle along with a request for a lower tier bunk and soft shoe chrono. Id. Plaintiff alleges on January 4, 2006, while imprisoned at Ironwood State Prison and assigned to the vocational small engine class, he was prohibited from attending class because he was not wearing state issued shoes. Id. Plaintiff alleges he was subjected to "racially harbored" disciplinary proceedings by Defendants that were reduced to a "farce and sham" as to alleged "failure to report" charges filed by Defendants Qualls, White, Patton. (Id. at 22.) Plaintiff alleges that Defendants' "retaliatory harbored ratification" culminated in the imposition of atypical and significant hardships. Plaintiff alleges he was assessed unfavorable conduct points for the two false disciplinary rule violation reports. Plaintiff also alleges he sustained a life threatening spinal injury at the hands of Defendants Qualls and White. (Id. at 27.) Plaintiff alleges Defendants retaliatorily transferred him to Calipatria State Prison (which is a more dangerous level IV high violence prison) and allowed him to deteriorate and deprived him of adequate medical care. (Id. at 28.)

In Plaintiff's first cause of action, he alleges on February 25, 2006, while imprisoned at Ironwood State Prison and housed with prisoner Brown, K-02190, Plaintiff was advised that he was being moved to another housing unit. (Id. at 30.) Plaintiff upon being made cognizant of the move to an upper tier cell approached the D-1 housing unit podium and advised an official that his upper tier cell should be canceled due to his medical condition and his inability to use the stairs predicated on his recently surgically repaired left knee as well as Plaintiff's medical chrono requiring lower tier bunk housing. Id. Upon Plaintiff's return to his cell, he was confronted by Defendant S. White, who in open retaliation for Plaintiff's litigation of a February 3, 2006 CDC 602 Form grievance complaint against him, turned a "retaliatory harbored" deaf ear to Plaintiff's medical concerns. (Id. at 30-31.) Plaintiff, while attempting to walk up the stairs to his cell and while carrying his property, fell down the stairs and injured his left knee, lumbar and cervical spine. Plaintiff sought medical attention because he could not ambulate. (Id. at 31.) Plaintiff alleges as a direct result of Defendant S. White he caused a "retaliatory harbored cell move culminating in lumbar, cervical spine, knee damage, which has resulted in permanent damage and wheelchair confinement." (Id. at 32.)

In Plaintiff's second cause of action, he alleges on December 14, 2007, he was retaliatory transferred to Corcoran State Prison and his property was impounded in Receiving and Release until January 18, 2008. Plaintiff alleges he was not allowed law library access until February 5, 2008. (Id. at 34.) Plaintiff also alleges in this same cause of action that on March 24 and May 31, 2006, he was subjected to retaliatory harbored deliberate indifference to pain and suffering by Defendants wherein Plaintiff suffered another episode wherein his severely painful spinal injury caused him to fall to the ground. (Id. at 37-38.) Plaintiff alleges he was precluded from seeking medical treatment for his painful spinal injury by Defendants who retaliatorily refused to allow him access to a doctor. (Id. at 38-44.)

In Plaintiff's third cause of action, he alleges on May 16, 2006 while imprisoned at Ironwood State Prison, he was summoned to a unit classification committee meeting for an annual review. (Id. at 46.) Plaintiff alleges his point score was increased based on two disciplinary reports. (Id. at 46-48.) Plaintiff alleges Defendants falsely charged him with battery on an inmate with a weapon and retaliatorily transferred him to Calipatria State Prison. (Id. at 49.) Plaintiff was also charged with battery on Defendant Moening, which culminated in 22 months of administrative segregation/security housing unit confinement coupled with Plaintiff being admitted as a patient of the prison psychiatric program after Plaintiff attempted to take his own life predicated upon such retaliatory harbored treatment. (Id. at 51-52.)

In Plaintiff's fourth cause of action, he alleges that he is disabled under the Americans with Disabilities Act and on June 21, 2006, while imprisoned at Ironwood, he was subjected to retaliatory harbored deprivation of his rights. (Id. at 52-57.) Plaintiff alleges that due to his spinal injury he needed medical accommodation of being housed in a lower tier-lower bunk but was housed on a lower tier-upper bunk cell. (Id. at 53.) Plaintiff was assigned a cellmate who was a gang member and adamantly expressed to Plaintiff that he was "not welcome". (Id. at 53.) Plaintiff alleges he attempted to file grievances against Defendants; however, the grievances were denied. (Id. at 54-56.)

In Plaintiff's fifth cause of action, he alleges that Defendants have retaliated and discriminated against him in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. Plaintiff alleges that Defendants have been deliberately indifferent to his medical needs and to his pain and suffering. Plaintiff alleges he was transferred after his suicide attempt from Calipatria State Prison to California State Prison - Lancaster. (Id. at 58.) Plaintiff alleges he was confined in an unequipped non-handicapped accessible administrative segregation cell and not provided with a proper medical examination and medical accommodations such as a walker. (Id. at 60.)

In Plaintiff's sixth cause of action, he alleges that while confined in administrative segregation his cell was unequipped for handicapped accessibility and therefore Plaintiff suffered more pain in his spine and lower back. (Id. at 67-82.) Plaintiff alleges that he was assaulted and battered by Defendants Moening and Morelli and was extracted from the unequipped non-handicapped-accessible administrative segregation cell and suffered deliberate medical/mental indifference to his pain and suffering. (Id. at 67-69.) Plaintiff alleges Defendants retaliated against him and filed false charges against him. (Id. at 69-82.)

In Plaintiff's seventh cause of action, he was subjected to retaliatorily harbored deliberate indifference to his pain and suffering and charged with battery on an inmate with a weapon. (Id. at 84.) Plaintiff alleges false disciplinary charges were filed against him. (Id. at 84-89.)

In Plaintiff's eighth cause of action, he alleges that he was subjected to false disciplinary charges and to retaliatory treatment by Defendants and suffered injuries. (Id. at 89-94.)

In Plaintiff's ninth cause of action, he alleges that Defendants retaliated against him and filed false disciplinary charges against him and were deliberately indifferent to his medical needs. (Id. at 95-100.)

In Plaintiff's tenth cause of action, he alleges that on October 18, 2007, Defendants retaliated against him and were deliberately indifferent to his medical needs. Defendants retaliated against Plaintiff in depriving him of his evening meal and pain medication. Plaintiff on September 26, ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.