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.

Lonzo E. Harris v. James D. Hartley

May 1, 2012

LONZO E. HARRIS,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
JAMES D. HARTLEY, 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

SECOND SCREENING ORDER

I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Plaintiff Lonzo E. Harris is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action filed September 26, 2011 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Compl., ECF No. 1.)

The 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

Plaintiff alleges Defendants were deliberately indifference to his serious medical needs in violation of his Eighth Amendment rights.

On September 3, 2011, while incarcerated at California State Prison-Avenal ("ASP"), Plaintiff suffered an asthma attack in the day room and collapsed to the floor unconscious with alleged incipient cardiac arrest. (Compl. at 5.) Prison staff sounded the alarm and Defendant Perkins, a prison nurse, responded. (Id.) Defendant Perkins told Plaintiff she would not treat him on the floor and that he had to be seated for treatment. (Id.) Plaintiff, panting and delirious, was assisted to a seat by guards. (Id.)

Defendant Perkins got agitated and raised her voice. She discovered he had a fever. (Id. at 6.) He was transported to the prison medical clinic. (Id.) An hour later he was transported to the hospital where he remained for four days. (Id.)

Plaintiff names as Defendants AVP Warden Hartley, AVP Nurse Perkins, and the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitations. (Id. at 3-4.)

Plaintiff seeks monetary compensation. ...


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.