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.

Leonardo v. Kaiwai

United States District Court, N.D. California

July 5, 2019

NOLAN F. LEONARDO, Plaintiff,
v.
DEPUTY KAIWAI, et al., Defendants.

          ORDER OF SERVICE

          DONNA M. RYU, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         I. INTRODUCTION

         Plaintiff, who is currently in custody at the San Francisco County Jail #5 in San Bruno, California, has filed a pro se civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging the use of excessive force against him during an incident in September 2018.

         Plaintiff has consented to magistrate judge jurisdiction, and this matter has been assigned to the undersigned Magistrate Judge. Dkts. 3, 5.

         Plaintiff's motions for leave to proceed in forma pauperis will be granted in a separate written Order. Dkts. 2, 6.

         Venue is proper because the events giving rise to the claims are alleged to have occurred in San Francisco County, which is located in this judicial district. See 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b).

         In his complaint, Plaintiff lists the following officers from the San Francisco County Sheriff's Department: Deputy Kaiwai; Lt. DeGuzman; and unnamed Sheriff's Deputies. Dkt. 1 at 2-3. Under the “Relief” section, he states as follows:

I want the court to order an investigation on the assault that took place in Sept. and I want every deputy involved to be charged accordingly. DeGuzman should not be a [lieutenant]. Kaiwai should be held responsible for my permanent injury.

Id. at 3. It is unclear whether he seeks monetary damages for the aforementioned “permanent injury.” See id.

         II. DISCUSSION

         A. Standard of Review

          A federal court must conduct a preliminary screening in any case in which a prisoner seeks redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). In its review, the court must identify any cognizable claims and dismiss any claims that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted or seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. Id. § 1915A(b)(1), (2). Pro se pleadings must be liberally construed. Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep't, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1988).

         To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two essential elements: (1) that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, and (2) that the alleged violation was committed by a person acting under the color of state law. West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988).

         B. ...


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.