Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_09-cv-03870/USCOURTS-cand-5_09-cv-03870-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Order of Dismissal

P:\PRO-SE\SJ.JW\CR.09\Gamache03870_dismissal.wpd

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JAMES ALLEN GAMACHE,

Plaintiff,

 vs.

JOHN DOE, et al.,

Defendant(s). 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 09-03870 JW (PR)

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Plaintiff, a prisoner at the California State Prison - Corcoran, has filed a pro

se civil rights complaint for damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Salinas Valley

State Prison officials, alleging they are liable for his injuries after a slip-and-fall that

occurred under escort at Monterey County Superior Court.

DISCUSSION

A. Standard of Review

Federal courts must engage in a preliminary screening of cases in which

prisoners seek redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a

governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The court must identify cognizable

claims or dismiss the complaint, or any portion of the complaint, if the complaint "is

Case 5:09-cv-03870-JW Document 10 Filed 01/15/10 Page 1 of 4
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Order of Dismissal

P:\PRO-SE\SJ.JW\CR.09\Gamache03870_dismissal.wpd 2

frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted," or

"seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief." Id. §

1915A(b).Pro se pleadings must be liberally construed. Balistreri v. Pacifica Police

Dep't., 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1990).

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege two essential

elements: (1) that a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States

was violated, and (2) that the alleged violation was committed by a person acting

under the color of state law. West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988).

B. Legal Claims

It is well-established that neither negligence nor gross negligence is

actionable under § 1983 in the prison context. See Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S.

825, 835-36 & n.4 (1994); Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1334 (9th Cir.

1990) (gross negligence insufficient to state claim for denial of medical needs to

prisoner). The applicable standard is one of deliberate indifference to inmate health

or safety under the Eighth Amendment, see Farmer, 511 U.S. at 834; Wilson v.

Seiter, 501 U.S. 294, 302 (1991), or, in the case of allegations of excessive force, the

prisoner must show that officials applied force “maliciously and sadistically for the

very purpose of causing harm,” Hudson v. McMillian, 503 U.S. 1, 6 (1992).

Plaintiff alleges that the two escorting officers, John Doe 1 and John Doe 2,

made plaintiff use the stairs rather than the handicap access elevator that was in

operation at the time. (Compl. at 6.) Plaintiff admits that he was able to make it up

the stairs very slowly albeit with some pain. (Id. at 5.) Plaintiff’s fall occurred later,

as he was on his way down, when one of his hard plastic soled shoes slipped off a

step. (Id. at 6.) 

Assuming that the allegations against defendants actions are true, their

actions amount to nothing more than negligence, or at the most gross negligence. 

Plaintiff has failed to show that defendants’ failure to use the elevator was motivated

by a deliberate intent to cause plaintiff harm rather than to avoid the inconvenience

Case 5:09-cv-03870-JW Document 10 Filed 01/15/10 Page 2 of 4
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Order of Dismissal

P:\PRO-SE\SJ.JW\CR.09\Gamache03870_dismissal.wpd

of a slow elevator. (Id.) Furthermore, defendants witnessed plaintiff walking up the

stairs without mishap and assistance and therefore it could not be said that they

knew or had reason to know at that time that he was incapable of walking down the

stairs safely on his own. Accordingly, plaintiff’s slip-and-fail claim is DISMISSED

because it amounts to no more than a claim of negligence and is not actionable under

§ 1983. 

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, the complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice. 

DATED:_____________________ 

JAMES WARE

United States District Judge

January 5, 2010 

Case 5:09-cv-03870-JW Document 10 Filed 01/15/10 Page 3 of 4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JAMES ALLEN GAMACHE,

Plaintiff,

 v.

JOHN DOE, et al.,

Defendants. /

Case Number: CV09-03870 JW 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District

Court, Northern District of California.

That on , I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the

attached, by placing said copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s)

hereinafter listed, by depositing said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into

an inter-office delivery receptacle located in the Clerk's office.

James Allen Gamache T-12825

CSP - Corcoran

P. O. Box 3481

Corcoran, CA 93212

Dated: 

Richard W. Wieking, Clerk

By: Elizabeth Garcia, Deputy Clerk

1/15/2010 1/15/2010 /s/

Case 5:09-cv-03870-JW Document 10 Filed 01/15/10 Page 4 of 4