Wheat

Smith v. Wheat

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaSeptember 2, 20222:21-cv-01859California2,374 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 WESLEY SMITH, individually; No. 2:21-cv-01859-MCE-CKD STEPHANIE SMITH, individually; and WESLEY SMITH and STEPHANIE SMITH as successors-in-interest to JEFFREY SMITH, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiffs, v. OFFICER M. WHEAT, et al., Defendants. 18 In bringing the present action, Plaintiffs Wesley Smith and Stephanie Smith, both individually and as successors-in-interest to their deceased son, Jeffrey Smith (hereinafter “Plaintiffs”) allege that eleven correctional officers at the High Desert State Prison (“HDSP”) in Susanville, California, Defendants Wheat, Rickett, Byers, Ramos, Zaun, Sevy, Mendoza, Villegas, Lee, Staub and Hicks (collectively “Defendants”) violated Jeffrey’s constitutional rights under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments when they failed to properly intervene and stop a stabbing attack against Jeffrey, who was incarcerated at HDSP, by two other inmates. Plaintiffs’ currently operative First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) alleges…

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.