Custino

(PC) Sekona v. Custino

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaSeptember 10, 20202:16-cv-00517California2,300 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ETUATE SEKONA, No. 2:16-CV-0517-JAM-DMC-P Plaintiff, v. ORDER F. CUSTINO, Defendant. 16 Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the Court is defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings (ECF No. 154). / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / I. BACKGROUND This action proceeds on plaintiff’s first amended complaint. See ECF No. 55. Following various dismissals, plaintiff’s sole surviving claim is an Eighth Amendment safety claim against defendant Custino. Specifically, plaintiff alleges that on June 27, 2014, correctional officer Custino ignored plaintiff’s safety concerns during a cell exchange. As a result, plaintiff was moved to a cell with a fellow inmate which plaintiff claimed to be dangerous. After the transfer, the fellow inmate allegedly…

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.