Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-00055/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-00055-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Archie Cranford
Plaintiff
Christina Crawford
Defendant

Document Text:

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ARCHIE CRANFORD,

Plaintiff,

v.

CHRISTINA CRAWFORD,

Defendant.

CASE NO. 1:14-cv-00055-MJS

ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT WITH 

LEAVE TO AMEND

(ECF NOS. 1, 8, and 9)

AMENDED COMPLAINT DUE WITHIN 

THIRTY (30) DAYS

SCREENING ORDER

I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Plaintiff Archie Cranford, a civil detainee proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, 

filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on January 15, 2014. (ECF No. 

1.) He has consented to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction. (ECF No. 4). His complaint is 

now before the Court for screening.

II. SCREENING REQUIREMENT

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), the Court must conduct an initial review of the 

Complaint for sufficiency to state a claim. The Court must dismiss a complaint or portion 

thereof if it determines that the action has raised claims that are legally “frivolous or 

malicious,” “fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted,” or that seek 

monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 

Case 1:14-cv-00055-AWI-MJS Document 11 Filed 02/27/14 Page 1 of 6
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

2

1915(e)(2)(B). “Notwithstanding any filing fee, or any portion thereof, that may have 

been paid, the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that . . . 

the action or appeal . . . fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted.” 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).

III. SUMMARY OF COMPLAINT1

Plaintiff names Christina Crawford, Nurse, Coalinga State Hospital as the sole 

Defendant and alleges the following:

On November 13, 2013, Plaintiff injured his groin area and could not walk 

unassisted. Plaintiff explained his injury to Defendant Crawford at sick call the following 

day. Defendant Crawford instructed Plaintiff to take Tylenol and Motrin and said she 

would check back later.

Defendant Crawford did not follow up with Plaintiff and he was forced to endure 

further pain as a result. Plaintiff‟s designation as a sexually violent predator caused

Defendant Crawford to ignore Plaintiff‟s medical need. (Compl. at 3, 4.)

IV. ANALYSIS

A. Section 1983

Section 1983 “provides a cause of action for the „deprivation of any rights, 

privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws‟ of the United States.” 

Wilder v. Virginia Hosp. Ass‟n, 496 U.S. 498, 508 (1990) (quoting 42 U.S.C. § 1983). 

Section 1983 is not itself a source of substantive rights, but merely provides a method for 

vindicating federal rights conferred elsewhere. Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386, 393-94 

(1989).

To state a claim under Section 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 

 

1

Since initiating this action Plaintiff has filed several motions expressing his concern that the complaint 

lodged with the Court is not a complete copy of his intended pleading. (ECF Nos. 8-9.) The following 

sections of this order will summarize the operative complaint on file for this action and the Court‟s analysis 

of Plaintiff‟s claim. The Court will grant leave to amend and provide Plaintiff with applicable legal 

standards and a copy of the operative complaint.

Case 1:14-cv-00055-AWI-MJS Document 11 Filed 02/27/14 Page 2 of 6
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

3

color of state law. See West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988); Ketchum v. Alameda 

Cnty., 811 F.2d 1243, 1245 (9th Cir. 1987).

A complaint must contain “a short and plain statement of the claim showing that 

the pleader is entitled to relief . . . .” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). Detailed factual allegations 

are not required, but “[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, 

supported by mere conclusory statements, do not suffice.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. 

1937, 1949 (2009) (citing Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)). 

Plaintiff must set forth “sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to „state a claim that is 

plausible on its face.‟” Id. Facial plausibility demands more than the mere possibility 

that a defendant committed misconduct and, while factual allegations are accepted as 

true, legal conclusions are not. Id. at 1949-50.

B. Inadequate Medical Care

As a civil detainee, Plaintiff is entitled to treatment more considerate than that 

afforded pretrial detainees or convicted criminals. Jones v. Blanas, 393 F.3d 918, 931-

32 (9th Cir. 2004). Plaintiff‟s right to constitutionally adequate conditions of confinement 

is protected by the substantive component of the Due Process Clause. Youngberg v. 

Romeo, 457 U.S. 307, 315 (1982). 

A determination whether Plaintiff‟s rights were violated requires “balancing of his 

liberty interests against the relevant state interests.” Youngberg, 457 U.S. at 321. 

Plaintiff is “entitled to more considerate treatment and conditions of confinement than 

criminals whose conditions of confinement are designed to punish,” but the Constitution 

requires only that courts ensure that professional judgment was exercised. Youngberg, 

457 U.S. at 321-22. A “decision, if made by a professional, is presumptively valid; 

liability may be imposed only when the decision by the professional is such a substantial 

departure from accepted professional judgment, practice, or standards as to 

demonstrate that the person responsible actually did not base the decision on such a 

judgment.” Id. at 322-23; cf. Clouthier v. County of Contra Costa, 591 F.3d 1232, 1243-

44 (9th Cir. 2010) (rejecting the Youngberg standard and applying the deliberate 

Case 1:14-cv-00055-AWI-MJS Document 11 Filed 02/27/14 Page 3 of 6
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

4

indifference standard to a pretrial detainee‟s right to medical care, and noting that pretrial 

detainees, who are confined to ensure presence at trial, are not similarly situated to 

those civilly committed). The professional judgment standard is an objective standard 

and it equates “to that required in ordinary tort cases for a finding of conscious 

indifference amounting to gross negligence.” Ammons v. Washington Dep‟t of Soc. & 

Health Servs., 648 F.3d 1020, 1029 (9th Cir. 2011), cert. denied, 132 S.Ct. 2379 (2012) 

(citations and internal quotation marks omitted).

Plaintiff alleges that Defendant Crawford failed to follow up with Plaintiff regarding 

his groin injury. The pain medication Defendant Crawford instructed Plaintiff to take was 

not effective, and Plaintiff unnecessarily endured pain as a result.

Plaintiff has a liberty interest in safe conditions of confinement protected 

substantively by the Due Process Clause. Youngberg, 457 U.S. at 315. Due process 

requires that he receive care that is professionally acceptable. Id. at 321. However, 

Plaintiff has not alleged enough facts to support the conclusion that Defendant 

Crawford‟s behavior was professionally unacceptable. Taking Plaintiff‟s allegations as 

true, Defendant Crawford initially provided treatment and then later failed to check in with 

Plaintiff as she said she would. Nothing in the Complaint indicates that the Defendant 

acted with conscious indifference.

Speculative, conclusory allegations aside, the Complaint does not demonstrate 

that Defendant Crawford exhibited a conscious indifference amounting to gross 

negligence. See Ammons, 648 F.3d at 1029. The mere possibility that Defendant 

Crawford ignored Plaintiff because of his sex offender status is not sufficient to state a 

claim. Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. at 1949-50.

Accordingly, Plaintiff fails to state a claim under the Due Process Clause for 

inadequate medical treatment. He will be permitted to amend. To state a claim Plaintiff 

must provide factual allegations to support the conclusion that the Defendant acted with 

conscious indifference.

V. CONCLUSION

Case 1:14-cv-00055-AWI-MJS Document 11 Filed 02/27/14 Page 4 of 6
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

5

Plaintiff‟s Complaint does not state a claim for relief. The Court will grant Plaintiff 

an opportunity to file an amended complaint. Noll v. Carlson, 809 F.2d 1446, 1448-49 

(9th Cir. 1987). If Plaintiff opts to amend, he must demonstrate that the alleged acts 

resulted in a deprivation of his constitutional rights. Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. at 1948-49. Plaintiff 

must set forth “sufficient factual matter . . . to „state a claim that is plausible on its face.‟” 

Id. at 1949 (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555 (2007)). Plaintiff must also demonstrate 

that each named Defendant personally participated in a deprivation of his rights. Jones 

v. Williams, 297 F.3d 930, 934 (9th Cir. 2002).

Plaintiff should note that although he has been given the opportunity to amend, it 

is not for the purposes of adding new claims. George v. Smith, 507 F.3d 605, 607 (7th 

Cir. 2007). Plaintiff should carefully read this Screening Order and focus his efforts on 

curing the deficiencies set forth above.

Finally, Plaintiff is advised that Local Rule 220 requires that an amended 

complaint be complete in itself without reference to any prior pleading. As a general 

rule, an amended complaint supersedes the original complaint. See Loux v. Rhay, 375 

F.2d 55, 57 (9th Cir. 1967). Once an amended complaint is filed, the original complaint 

no longer serves any function in the case. Therefore, in an amended complaint, as in an 

original complaint, each claim and the involvement of each defendant must be 

sufficiently alleged. The amended complaint should be clearly and boldly titled “First 

Amended Complaint,” refer to the appropriate case number, and be an original signed 

under penalty of perjury. Plaintiff's amended complaint should be brief. Fed. R. Civ. P. 

8(a). Although accepted as true, the “[f]actual allegations must be [sufficient] to raise a 

right to relief above the speculative level . . . .” Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555 (citations 

omitted).

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Clerk‟s Office shall send Plaintiff (1) a blank civil rights complaint form 

and (2) a copy of his Complaint, filed January 15, 2014;

2. Plaintiff‟s Complaint is dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which 

Case 1:14-cv-00055-AWI-MJS Document 11 Filed 02/27/14 Page 5 of 6
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

6

relief may be granted;

3. Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint within thirty (30) days; and

4. If Plaintiff fails to file an amended complaint in compliance with this order, 

this action will be dismissed, with prejudice, for failure to state a claim and failure to 

comply with a court order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 26, 2014 /s/Michael J. Seng 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-00055-AWI-MJS Document 11 Filed 02/27/14 Page 6 of 6