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.

Sean Gregory Johnson v. James A. Yates

October 30, 2011

SEAN GREGORY JOHNSON,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
JAMES A. YATES, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Michael J. Seng United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER DISMISSING PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO AMEND (ECF No. 1) AMENDED COMPLAINT DUE WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS SCREENING ORDER

I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY

On May 17, 2010, Plaintiff Sean Gregory Johnson, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (ECF No. 1.) Plaintiff consented to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction. (ECF No. 5.) Plaintiff's Complaint is now before the Court for screening.

II. SCREENING REQUIREMENT

The Court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The Court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are legally "frivolous, malicious," or that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1),(2). "Notwithstanding any filing fee, or any portion thereof, that may have been paid, the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that . . . the action or appeal . . . fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted." 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).

Section 1983 "provides a cause of action for the 'deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws' of the United States." Wilder v. Virginia Hosp. Ass'n, 496 U.S. 498, 508 (1990) (quoting 42 U.S.C. § 1983). Section 1983 is not itself a source of substantive rights, but merely provides a method for vindicating federal rights conferred elsewhere. Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386, 393-94 (1989).

III. SUMMARY OF COMPLAINT

The Complaint alleges the following Pleasant Valley State Prison ("PVSP") officials violated Plaintiff's rights under the Eighth Amendment: (1) James A. Yates, Warden; (2) Dr. F. Igbinoza; and (3) John Does one through five.

Plaintiff alleges the following:

In September, 2008 Plaintiff began experiencing symptoms of Valley Fever. (Compl. at 4.) On November 12, 2008 he tested positive for Valley Fever. (Id. at 4, 10.) "Plaintiff lost approximately thirty (30) pounds in weight, suffered intense pain throughout his entire body, was extremely fatigued, had night sweats, muscle fatigue, difficulty in sleeping, sweating, [and] chills . . . ." (Id. at 3.) Plaintiff was medicated with Difulca to combat the Valley Fever and "Boost" to regain lost weight. However, Plaintiff's prescriptions were inadequate and administered sporadically. Plaintiff was not warned of Valley Fever's prevalence at PVSP, he was not instructed on how to mitigate the risk of contraction, and he was not provided with a surgical mask, even on windy days. (Id. at 6.)

IV. ANALYSIS

To state a claim under Section 1983, a plaintiff must allege two essential elements:

(1) that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated and

(2) that the alleged violation was committed by a person acting under the color of state law. See West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988); Ketchum v. Alameda ...


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.