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.

Kinnamon v. Hubbard

United States District Court, E.D. California

September 17, 2014

TODD KINNAMON, Plaintiff,
v.
HUBBARD, et al., Defendants.

ORDER DISMISSING SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND

DENNIS L. BECK, Magistrate Judge.

Plaintiff Todd Kinnamon, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this civil rights action on January 24, 2013. The Court dismissed the complaint with leave to amend on September 6, 2013. On September 26, 2013, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint ("FAC"). His FAC was dismissed on March 6, 2014, with leave to amend. On March 26, 2014, Plaintiff filed his Second Amended Complaint ("SAC"). He names California State Prison, Corcoran ("CSP") Warden Susan Hubbard and R.N. Soto as Defendants.[1]

A. LEGAL STANDARD

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 , 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009) (citing Bell Atl. 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.'" Id . (quoting Twombly , 550 U.S. at 555). While factual allegations are accepted as true, legal conclusions are not. Id.

To state a claim, Plaintiff must demonstrate that each defendant personally participated in the deprivation of his rights. Id. at 1949. This requires the presentation of factual allegations sufficient to state a plausible claim for relief. Iqbal , 129 S.Ct. at 1949-50; Moss v. U.S. Secret Service , 572 F.3d 962, 969 (9th Cir. 2009). The mere possibility of misconduct falls short of meeting this plausibility standard. Iqbal , 129 S.Ct. at 1949-50; Moss , 572 F.3d at 969.

B. SUMMARY OF PLAINTIFF'S ALLEGATIONS

Plaintiff is currently incarcerated at the Richard J. Donovan Correctional Facility in San Diego, California. The events at issue occurred while Plaintiff was housed at CSP.

Plaintiff alleges that on April 9, 2012, he had surgery on his left knee. Plaintiff was thereafter dependent on a walker and used serious pain medication.

On April 21, 2012, Plaintiff was directed to walk on a dirt path "consisting of rocks and potholes" with his walker. ECF No. 13, at 4. Plaintiff said that the path was not safe to walk on. However, staff directing the line said that the path was the only way to the pill line.

Plaintiff continued walking, but the right side of his walker got caught in one of the potholes and he fell onto his left knee, which was bandaged from surgery. Plaintiff also injured his back. He was placed into a wheelchair and rushed to the yard clinic, then to the acute care division of the prison hospital.

Defendant Soto determined that Plaintiff's knee was okay and she sent him back to his cell without checking on the stitches from his surgery. Plaintiff was rescheduled to see the yard doctor.

Seven days passed "without dressing" and Plaintiff noticed that his left knee was badly infected. He went to the medical clinic on the yard and the acting LVN sent him back to the hospital. The doctor pulled the bandage off and said, "What happened? Why is the stitch area infected?" ECF No. 13, at 5. Plaintiff told the doctor what happened. The doctor inserted an IV line and admitted Plaintiff to the hospital.

After seven days in the hospital, the doctor and physical therapist recommended that Plaintiff be placed in a wheelchair due to the severity of the new injury. They also recommended that ...


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.