Source: http://ca.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.20090430_0006788.ECA.htm/qx
Timestamp: 2017-02-27 11:16:36
Document Index: 524696404

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 1983', '§ 1915', '§ 1915', '§ 1983', '§ 1915', '§ 1367']

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Defendants removed this action from state court. On June 5, 2008, plaintiff filed a second amended complaint. Defendants have requested that the court screen the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A and that the court stay the time to respond to the first amended complaint.
The court finds that, for the limited purposes of § 1915A screening, the complaint states claims that: (1) defendants Thomas, Murray, and Turner interfered with plaintiff's serious medical needs in retaliation for plaintiff's having filed lawsuits and/or grievances; (2) Thomas, Murray, and Turner interfered with a physician's prescribed care following knee surgery in violation of the Eighth Amendment; and (3) Thomas, Murray and Turner were negligent under state law in how they treated plaintiff following plaintiff's knee surgery. See 42 U.S.C. § 1983, 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b); 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a).
1. Defendants' June 20, 2008, request that the court review plaintiff's complaint and stay the time for responding to the first amended complaint is granted;
2. Defendants need not respond to the first amended complaint; and
3. Within 30 days from the date of this order, defendants Thomas, Murray and Turner shall file and serve a response to the June 5, 2008, second amended complaint.