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.

Wardene Kimm Cannon v. J. Metts

September 27, 2012

WARDENE KIMM CANNON,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
J. METTS, ET AL.,
DEFENDANTS.



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

ORDER DISMISSING PLAINTIFFS'S COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO AMEND (ECF No. 6) AMENDED COMPLAINT DUE WITHIN THIRTY DAYS

Plaintiff Wardene Kimm Cannon ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff has consented to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction. (ECF No. 5.) No other parties have appeared.

Plaintiff initiated this action on May 25, 2012. (Compl., ECF No. 1.) Prior to the Court screening Plaintiff's original Complaint, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint. (Am. Compl., ECF No. 6.) Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint is now before the Court for screening.

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. PLAINTIFF'S CLAIMS

Plaintiff is currently incarcerated at California Substance Abuse Treatment Facility ("CSATF"), where the alleged underlying events occurred. Plaintiff alleges that the following individuals violated his right to adequate medical care under the Eighth Amendment; violated his Fourteenth Amendment rights; and violated his First Amendment right to free speech and freedom from cruel and unusual punishment: 1) J. Metts, doctor and primary care provider at CSATF and 2) A. Enenmoh, Chief Medical Officer ("CMO") at CSATF.*fn1

His allegations are as follows:

Defendants Metts and Enenmoh failed to provide medical care for his pain condition. (Am. Compl. at 3.) Defendant Metts was the primary care provider responsible for treating Plaintiff. (Id. at 5.) Defendant Metts saw Plaintiff for his knee and back pain but was provided no pain relief. (Id. at 3.) Plaintiff filed complaints about his pain issues, but still received no treatment from Defendant Metts. (Id. at 5.) Defendant Enenmoh, as chief medical officer, could have ensured Plaintiff received knee surgery, a proper diet, and adequate pain management, but he failed to do so. (Id. at 6.)

Plaintiff weighs over four hundred pounds, and because of his weight needs medical treatment. (Am. Compl. at 4.) Defendants were aware of Plaintiff's condition but refused to treat him. (Id.) Plaintiff was not given dietary accommodations that would have helped with his weight issues. (Id.)

Due to his conditions, Plaintiff was hospitalized several times for blood pressure. (Am. Compl. at 5.) Plaintiff was in pain from 2009 to 2012. (Id. at 6.)

Plaintiff asks for knee surgery, pain management, a low calorie diet, $20,000 in punitive damages for each day Plaintiff was not provided with pain medication, and ...


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.