Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-01336/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-01336-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Doust
Defendant
Sawicki
Defendant
Glen A. Westover
Plaintiff

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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GLEN A. WESTOVER,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-06-1336 LKK GGH P

vs.

DOCTOR DOUST, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

On September 19, 2006, the court ordered the U.S. Marshal to serve defendants

Doust and Sawicki with the original complaint. On November 20, 2006, defendants filed an

answer.

On September 14, 2006, plaintiff filed an amended complaint. Defendants Doust

and Sawicki are again named as defendants. The allegations against these defendants are

identical to the allegations against them in the original complaint. Plaintiff also lists R.L.

Andreasen, Dr. Khoury, N. Grannis and Donahue as defendants. However the amended

complaint contains no specific allegations against these defendants. 

/////

/////

Case 2:06-cv-01336-LKK -GGH Document 13 Filed 12/22/06 Page 1 of 3
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

2

The Civil Rights Act under which this action was filed provides as follows:

Every person who, under color of [state law] . . . subjects, or causes

to be subjected, any citizen of the United States . . . to the

deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the

Constitution . . . shall be liable to the party injured in an action at

law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress. 

42 U.S.C. § 1983. The statute requires that there be an actual connection or link between the

actions of the defendants and the deprivation alleged to have been suffered by plaintiff. See

Monell v. Department of Social Servs., 436 U.S. 658 (1978); Rizzo v. Goode, 423 U.S. 362

(1976). “A person ‘subjects’ another to the deprivation of a constitutional right, within the

meaning of § 1983, if he does an affirmative act, participates in another's affirmative acts or

omits to perform an act which he is legally required to do that causes the deprivation of which

complaint is made.” Johnson v. Duffy, 588 F.2d 740, 743 (9th Cir. 1978).

Moreover, supervisory personnel are generally not liable under § 1983 for the

actions of their employees under a theory of respondeat superior and, therefore, when a named

defendant holds a supervisorial position, the causal link between him and the claimed

constitutional violation must be specifically alleged. See Fayle v. Stapley, 607 F.2d 858, 862

(9th Cir. 1979); Mosher v. Saalfeld, 589 F.2d 438, 441 (9th Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 442 U.S.

941 (1979). Vague and conclusory allegations concerning the involvement of official personnel

in civil rights violations are not sufficient. See Ivey v. Board of Regents, 673 F.2d 266, 268 (9th

Cir. 1982).

Because plaintiff has failed to link defendants Andreasen, Khoury, Grannis and

Donahue to the alleged deprivations, the court will not order service of the amended complaint

on these proposed new defendants. 

Because the allegations against defendants Doust and Sawicki are the same as

those contained in the original complaint, the court will not order them to answer the amended

complaint.

/////

Case 2:06-cv-01336-LKK -GGH Document 13 Filed 12/22/06 Page 2 of 3
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

3

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the amended complaint filed

September 14, 2006, is dismissed. 

DATED: 12/22/06 /s/ Gregory G. Hollows

 

GREGORY G. HOLLOWS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

west1336.ord

Case 2:06-cv-01336-LKK -GGH Document 13 Filed 12/22/06 Page 3 of 3