Modhaddam

(PC) Morris v. Modhaddam

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMay 6, 20212:18-cv-02850California6,271 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 CONDALEE MORRIS, No. 2: 18-cv-2850 MCE KJN P Plaintiff, v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

G. MODHADDAM, et al., Defendants. 16 Introduction Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding without counsel, with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action proceeds on plaintiff’s second amended complaint filed May 14, 2019, against defendants Dr. Modhaddam, Dr. Bishop and Dr. Tesluk, as to plaintiff’s claim that these defendants violated plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment right to adequate medical care by denying plaintiff’s requests to adjust his glaucoma medications to alleviate side effects of headaches, eye pain, nausea and blurred vision. (ECF Nos. 15 (second amended complaint), 28 (service order setting forth claims on which this action proceeds).) Each defendant is represented by separate counsel. Pending before the court are motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim pursuant to…

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.