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.

Diamond v. Corizon Health, Inc.

United States District Court, N.D. California

September 5, 2017

CHRISTINE DIAMOND, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
CORIZON HEALTH, INC., et al., Defendants.

          ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS RE: DKT. NO. 40

          JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY United States Magistrate Judge

         Plaintiffs filed sue Corizon Health, Inc., the County of Alameda, Sheriff Gregory J. Ahern, and various Corizon employees and members of the Alameda County Sheriff's Department alleging civil rights claims under Section 1983, negligence, and a violation of California Government Code § 845.6. The claims arise out of the death of their relative, Bryan Steicher, while he was a pretrial detainee at Santa Rita Jail. Now pending before the Court is Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint (“FAC”), for Judgment on the Pleadings, and/or to Strike the Section 845.6 claim and Plaintiffs' request for injunctive relief. (Dkt. No. 40.) After considering the parties' briefing, and the Court's prior orders, the Court concludes that oral argument is unnecessary and grants Defendants' motion.

         PROCEDURAL HISTORY

         Plaintiffs originally sued Corizon, Sheriff Ahern, and various Doe defendants. By Order filed December 2, 2016, the Court dismissed Plaintiffs' California Government Code § 845.6 claim against Corizon without leave to amend and against the County Defendants with leave to amend. The Court also dismissed the claim for injunctive relief with leave to amend. The Order gave Plaintiffs 20 days, that is until December 22, 2016, to file an amended complaint and specifically warned Plaintiffs that a failure to file an amended complaint by that date would mean the injunctive relief and section 845.6 claims against the County defendants are dismissed with prejudice and no longer in the case. (Dkt. No. 21.) Plaintiffs did not file an amended complaint by that deadline; accordingly, on January 26, 2017 the Court dismissed that section 845.6 claim and the injunctive relief claim without leave to amend. (Dkt. No. 22.)

         The next day Plaintiffs filed a First Amended Complaint (“FAC”). The FAC adds 11 individual County and Corizon defendants, including two doctors and several county sheriff deputies, and includes all the same claims from the original complaint, including the section 845.6 claim and the demand for injunctive relief. Specifically, the section 1983 claim is against Corizon and Sheriff Ahern, the section 845.6 is against Corizon and the Corizon employees, and the negligence claim is against all defendants and thus is the one claim alleged against the newly added defendants. (Dkt. No. 24.)

         All served defendants subsequently filed the now pending motion to dismiss/motion for judgment on the pleadings.

         DISCUSSION

         I. California Government Code § 845.6

         Plaintiffs reallege their section 845.6 claim against Corizon and add the individual Corizon defendants to the claim. (Dkt. No. at 24 at 12.) The Court, however, already dismissed this claim against Corizon without leave to amend. (Dkt. Nos. 21.) The same reasoning applies to the individual Corizon defendants. The claim is therefore again dismissed with prejudice.

         II. Negligence

         Plaintiffs' negligence claim is brought against “all defendants.” Plaintiffs, however, plead no facts whatsoever to support their negligence claim against any defendant; indeed, there are no factual allegations against any of the individual defendants. The claim is dismissed.

         III. Injunctive Relief

         The Court previously dismissed the demand for injunctive relief for lack of standing without leave to amend. (Dkt Nos. 21, ...


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.