Quiring

(PC) Casteneda v. Quiring

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaAugust 10, 20232:21-cv-02196California8,153 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 LORENZO CASTENEDA, No. 2:21-cv-2196 DAD KJN P Plaintiff, v. ORDER J. QUIRING, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding pro se with an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff’s motion to compel production of documents, fully briefed, is now before the court. As set forth below, plaintiff’s motion to compel is partially granted. I. Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint Plaintiff, under the EOP1 level of mental health care, alleges that on two separate occasions, defendants J. Quiring, K. McTaggart, J. Rowe and S. Medina conspired to violate plaintiff’s Eighth and First Amendment rights by handcuffing his hands extremely tightly behind his back and placing him in a small stand up cage with no seat and without water or restroom

The Mental Health Services Delivery System Program Guide for the California Department of 26 Corrections and Rehabilitation provides four levels of mental health…

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.