United States District Court, E.D. California
ALLISON CLAIRE, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
who was previously detained in the Sacramento County Jail,
proceeds with counsel in this civil rights action filed
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff paid the filing
fee. This order screens plaintiff's complaint pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 1915A, and directs plaintiff to timely serve
process on the appropriate defendants.
Screening of Plaintiff's Complaint
Legal Standards for Screening Prisoner Civil Rights
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). A claim is legally frivolous when it lacks
an arguable basis either in law or in fact. Neitzke v.
Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989); Franklin v.
Murphy, 745 F.2d 1221, 1227-28 (9th Cir. 1984).
of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure “requires only
‘a short and plain statement of the claim showing that
the pleader is entitled to relief,' in order to
‘give the defendant fair notice of what the . . . claim
is and the grounds upon which it rests.'” Bell
Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)
(quoting Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 47 (1957)).
“Pleadings shall be so construed as to do
justice.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(e). “[T]he pleading
standard Rule 8 announces does not require ‘detailed
factual allegations,' but it demands more than an
accusation.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662,
678 (2009) (quoting Twombly at 555). To survive
dismissal for failure to state a claim, “a complaint
must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to
“state a claim to relief that is plausible on its
face.'” Iqbal at 678 (quoting
Twombly at 570). “A claim has facial
plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that
allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the
defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged. The
plausibility standard is not akin to a ‘probability
requirement,' but it asks for more than a sheer
possibility that a defendant has acted unlawfully.”
Id. (citing Twombly at 556). “Where a
complaint pleads facts that are ‘merely consistent
with' a defendant's liability, it ‘stops short
of the line between possibility and plausibility of
“entitlement to relief.”'” Id.
(quoting Twombly at 557).
alleges that, on August 17, 2018, he was injured while being
transported from the Sacramento County Family Court back to
the Sacramento County Jail. Plaintiff states that he was
shackled in handcuffs and leg restraints and placed in a seat
in the back of the transport vehicle without being secured in
a seat belt. He alleges that defendant Stephen Michael
Buccellato, a Sacramento County Sheriff's Deputy,
“drove the transport vehicle at unsafe speeds and in a
reckless manner, which led him to slamming on the brakes in
an abrupt and reckless manner . . . [and] rear-ended another
vehicle. ECF No. 1 at 3. “As a result of the force of
impact from the collision, the Plaintiff, who was not
restrained in a seat belt and could not break his fall with
his restrained hands, was thrown with great force
approximately five feet inside of the transport vehicle,
causing him to suffer severe injuries to his back.”
names as defendants Deputy Buccellato in his individual
capacity, Sacramento County, and Does 1-25. Plaintiff states
that he “filed a timely government claim against
Defendants pursuant to California Government Code § 910
et seq. [which] was subsequently rejected by Sacramento
County on March 5, 2019.” ECF No. 1 at 3 ¶ 13.
asserts a federal due process claim against “all
defendants;” a state law negligence claim against
“all defendants and Does 1-25;” and a state law
vicarious liability claim against Sacramento
County. Plaintiff seeks declaratory and injunctive
relief (with the goal of preventing similar injuries to other
Sacramento County detainees), as well as compensatory,
general and punitive damages.
complaint makes no charging allegations against
“Defendant Does 1-25, ” noting only that their
capacities are unknown “but upon ascertaining these
individuals' identities, the Plaintiff will seek leave to
amend to name ...