Carter

(PC) Israel v. Carter

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaAugust 25, 20222:21-cv-01267California3,254 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 AKIVA A. ISRAEL, No. 2: 21-cv-1267 TLN KJN P Plaintiff, v. ORDER RUBY CARTER, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding without counsel, with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the court is plaintiff’s motion to compel. (ECF No. 53.) For the reasons stated herein, plaintiff’s motion to compel is denied. Background To put the motion to compel in context, the undersigned herein sets forth the claims on which this action proceeds. This action proceeds on the second amended complaint against defendant Ruby Carter as to claims one and two. (ECF No. 35.) Plaintiff alleges that on August 18, 2020, defendant Carter violated the Eighth Amendment by denying plaintiff Mirtazapine and Hydroxyzine. (Id.) Plaintiff alleges that as a result of not receiving her medication, her mental and medical conditions deteriorated and she suffered suicidal ideation. …

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.