Gregge v. California Department of Corrections

Good Law
444 F. App'x 939
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 22, 201110-16239California210 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

California state prisoner Lorenzo Gregge, Jr., appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deliberate indifference to his health and safety. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo the district court’s dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A for failure to state a claim, Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir.2000). We reverse and remand.

Gregge’s complaint, liberally construed, did not seek to allege a respondeat superior theory of liability. Rather, Gregge alleged that defendants implemented a policy that resulted in the denial of his constitutional rights. See Redman v. Cnty. of San Diego, 942 F.2d 1435, 1446 (9th Cir.1991) (en banc) (“Supervisory liability exists even without overt personal participation in the offensive act if supervisory officials implement a policy so deficient that the policy itself is a repudiation of constitutional rights and is the moving force of the constitutional violation.” (citations and internal quotation marks omitted)). Therefore, dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A was premature, and we reverse and remand for further proceedings.

Gregge shall bear his own…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.