King

(PC) Joy v. King

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaOctober 9, 20192:19-cv-00790California4,008 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ERIC DARNELL JOY, No. 2:19-cv-0790 JAM DB P Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS C. KING, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff alleges defendants were deliberately indifferent to his safety in violation of the Eighth Amendment. Before the court is defendant’s motion for summary judgment. For the reasons set forth below, this court will recommend defendant’s motion be granted and this action be dismissed for plaintiff’s failure to exhaust his administrative remedies prior to filing suit. BACKGROUND Plaintiff filed his civil rights complaint in this court on May 2, 2019. (ECF No. 1.) Plaintiff alleges that in February 2019 at Mule Creek State Prison (“MCSP”), defendants King

1 Under the “mailbox rule,” the court considers the date a prisoner turns over…

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.