(PC)Sams

(PC)Sams v. Lundy

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaFebruary 13, 20241:23-cv-00172California1,603 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

BACKGROUND

24 Plaintiff initiated this action by filing a civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 25 (Doc. No. 1, “Complaint”). The Complaint names as Defendants the California Department of 26 Corrections and Rehabilitation (“CDCR”), two Doe defendants, and 13 CDCR staff and 27 1 This matter was referred to the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302 (E.D. Cal. 2022). supervisors. (Id. at 2). The Complaint sets forth 17 causes of action, under the 1st, 8th and 14th Amendments, the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), the Armstrong Remedial Plan (“ARP”), the Bane Act, a state law negligence claim, various combinations of the above causes of action, and a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress. (Id.). On September 22, 2023, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A the Court issued a screening order finding the Complaint failed to state a federal claim against any Defendant. (See generally Doc. No. 12). The Court afforded Plaintiff the opportunity to file an amended complaint, stand on his Complaint subject to the undersigned issuing Findings and Recommendations to the district court to dismiss the…

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.