Chenalo

(PC) Thomas v. Chenalo

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaSeptember 27, 20231:19-cv-01185California3,923 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

I. BACKGROUND

23 A. Summary of Plaintiff’s Complaint 24 Plaintiff Albert Eugene Thomas (“Plaintiff” or “Thomas”), a state prisoner, initiated this 25 action by filing a pro se civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C § 1983. (Doc. No. 1). Thomas 26 27 1 This matter was referred to the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302(c)(17) (E.D. Ca. 2022). proceeds on his second amended complaint. (Doc. No. 20, “SAC”). The Court screened the SAC and found it stated cognizable Eighth Amendment conditions of confinement claims against Defendants Salas, Medina, Flores and an unnamed “C/O #1 Third Watch.” (Doc. No. 21 at 8). According to the SAC, on June 22, 2019, Plaintiff moved into building A1-126 at North Kern State Prison (“NKSP”). (Doc. No. 20 at 5). Plaintiff immediately noticed a “strong odor” coming from his cell. (Id. at 5-6). There was mold and mildew on the walls, the cell was filled with rust, leaking “filthy stinking” water puddled on the floor, and the improperly installed light switch shocked Plaintiff when he turned the light on or off. (Id. at 6-9). Plaintiff complained about the cell’s conditions and…

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.