Casey

(PC) Felix v. Casey

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaNovember 7, 20232:18-cv-03185California6,393 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 EDDIE FELIX, No. 2:18-cv-3185 DJC AC Plaintiff, v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

JONH CASEY, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is a California state prisoner proceeding in pro se with a civil rights action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Four motions are before the court: defendant Sam Wong’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 37); defendant John Casey’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 40); plaintiff’s “motion for summary judgment” (ECF No. 41); and plaintiff’s subsequent “motion for summary judgment and for sanctions” (ECF No. 50). I. BACKGROUND On screening of the Second Amended Complaint (ECF No. 11), the undersigned found that plaintiff had stated Eighth Amendment claims for deliberate indifference to serious medical needs against defendants John Casey, M.D., a surgeon at San Joaquin General Hospital, and Sam Wong, M.D., plaintiff’s primary care provider at Mule Creek State Prison. …

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.