Scott

(PC) Carroll v. Scott

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJuly 21, 20201:20-cv-00086California6,377 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

I. BACKGROUND

27 Craig Carroll (“Plaintiff”) is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis 28 with this civil rights action. Plaintiff filed the complaint commencing this action on January 15, 2020. (ECF No. 1). Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint on February 24, 2020. (ECF No. 12). The Court screened the First Amended Complaint and directed Plaintiff to either: “a. Notify the Court in writing that he wants to proceed only on his claim for excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment against Defendants Lt. Scott, Officer Holmes, and Doe Officers; b. File a Second Amended Complaint; or c. Notify the Court in writing that he wants to stand on his First Amended Complaint, subject to the Court issuing findings and recommendations to a district judge consistent with this order.” (ECF No. 13, pgs. 10-11). On May 1, 2020, Plaintiff filed his Second Amended Complaint. (ECF No. 14). The Court has screened the Second Amended Complaint and finds that Plaintiff states a cognizable Bivens claim for excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment against Defendants Lt. Scott, Officer Holmes, and Doe…

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.