Barrett

Barrett v. Berry

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaSeptember 30, 20204:19-cv-01923California7,462 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 JOSEPH ANTHONY BARRETT, Case No. 19-cv-01923-HSG

Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND

v. DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’

MOTION FOR SUMMARY

G. BERRY, et al., JUDGMENT Defendants. Re: Dkt. Nos. 35,

12 I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff brings a pro se action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging that on February 6, 2017, his Eighth Amendment rights were violated by San Quentin State Prison (“SQSP”) officers J. Dougery, M. Gaitan, J. Castro, S. Giminez, A. Strayhorn and J. King when they failed to intervene when defendant G. Berry sprayed him with pepper spray, which constituted excessive force. He also alleges that these defendants were deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs by failing to promptly decontaminate him from the pepper spray. He alleges that defendant Dr. Berger used excessive force by giving him a forcible injection. Now pending before the Court is defendants’ motion for summary…

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.