Young

Young v. Jones

Good Law
220 F. App'x 484
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 26, 2007No. 05-56778California340 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

California state prisoner Eddie Young appeals pro se from the district court judgment in favor of defendants in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging defendants used excessive force and violated his Eighth Amendment rights. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo the district court’s grant of summary judgment, Delta Savings Bank v. United States, 265 F.3d 1017, 1021 (9th Cir.2001), and we review for abuse of discretion the district court’s denial of a motion for a new trial, Amantea Cabrera v. Potter, 279 F.3d 746, 750 (9th Cir.2002). We affirm.

Young contends the district court improperly granted summary judgment to defendant Large on Young’s claim that his cellmate attacked him after he requested to be moved to a different cell. Summary judgment was appropriate because Young failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact as to whether Large ignored a substantial risk that Young’s cellmate would seriously harm him. See Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 837 , 114 S.Ct. 1970 , 128 L.Ed.2d 811 (1994) (holding that to act with deliberate indifference, a prison official must be aware of facts from which he could infer the existence of a…

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.