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.

Nicholas Moran v. K. Dutra

July 14, 2012

NICHOLAS MORAN,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
K. DUTRA, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.



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

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

Plaintiff Nicholas Moran ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

Plaintiff initiated this action on June 7, 2011. (Compl., ECF No. 1.) No other parties have appeared in this action. Plaintiff's Complaint is now before the Court for screening.

For the reasons set forth below, the Court finds that Plaintiff's Complaint fails to state a claim. Plaintiff will be given leave to amend.

I. 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 or malicious," 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).

A complaint must contain "a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief . . . ." Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). Detailed factual allegations are not required, but "[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements, do not suffice." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, ___ U.S. ___, ___, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009) (citing Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)). Plaintiff must set forth "sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim that is plausible on its face.'" Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. at 1949 (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555). Facial plausibility demands more than the mere possibility that a defendant committed misconduct and, while factual allegations are accepted as true, legal conclusions are not. Id. at 1949-50.

II. SUMMARY OF PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT

Plaintiff is currently housed at Pleasant Valley State Prison ("PVSP"), where the events at issue in his Complaint occurred. Plaintiff sues the following individuals for inadequate medical care and excessive force under the Eighth Amendment: 1) K. Dutra, medical correctional officer at PVSP, 2) Ryan, registered nurse at PVSP, 3) Dedee, registered nurse at PVSP, and 4) Auten, correctional officer at PVSP.

Plaintiff alleges as follows:

Defendants Ryan and Dedee violated Plaintiff's rights under the Eighth Amendment by providing him with inadequate medical care. (Compl. at 3.) Defendants Dutra and Auten violated his rights under the Eighth Amendment by their use of unnecessary and excessive force against him. (Id.)

Plaintiff suffers from lower back pain. (Compl. at 3.) He was transported to PVSP on April 3, 2008. (Id.) From May 14, 2008 to June 2009, Plaintiff submitted numerous inmate medical request forms. (Id. at 3-6.) Plaintiff received some treatment during this period; he was seen by outside doctors in June 2008 and May of 2009. (Id. at 4, 5.)

In July 6, 2009, Plaintiff went to the prison medical clinic to discuss his treatment. (Compl. at 6.) Defendant Dutra unnecessarily involved himself in the conversation and Plaintiff felt threatened. (Id.)

Plaintiff went to the medical clinic on July 7, 2009, using a borrowed cane. (Compl. at 6.) Defendant Dedee interviewed him and took his vital signs. (Id.) Defendant Dedee yelled at Plaintiff and called him a liar. (Id.) Defendant Dedee confiscated the cane and told Plaintiff to go back to his cell. (Id.) Defendant Dedee knew of Plaintiff's medical condition and knew Plaintiff had difficulty walking without a cane. (Id. at 7.) Defendants Dedee and Ryan asked Defendant Dutra to escort Plaintiff out of the clinic. (Id.) At this point, Plaintiff began to experience a pain spasm that made walking even more difficult. (Id.) Defendant Dutra tackled Plaintiff, threw him on the floor, and handcuffed him with Defendant Auten's help. (Id.) Defendant Dutra used excessive ...


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.