Rainwater
Rainwater v. Alarcon
Opinion
lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM *
Charles Christman (“Christman”) appeals the district court’s orders dismissing his claims against Defendants 1 in their official capacities and granting summary judgment for Defendants on all counts. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand.
Christman is classified as a sexually violent predator (“SVP”). He has been involuntarily committed at Atascadero State Hospital (“ASH”) for treatment. He alleges that Defendants, officials at ASH, began him on a course of Lupron treatment without his informed consent, and continued him on such treatment after they knew or should have known that it caused him and other patients at the facility to develop osteoporosis. Invoking § 1983, Christman alleges that Defendants’ actions in providing him with Lupron violated his Fourteenth and Eighth Amendment rights.
Christman first argues that the district court erred in dismissing his claims against Defendants in their official capacities. We disagree. We review de novo a district court’s grant of a motion to dismiss under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). Sacks v. Office of Foreign Assets Control, 466 F.3d 764, 770 (9th Cir.2006). Here, the…