Cooper v. Khorge

Background

Elijah Cooper, a state prisoner proceeding without a lawyer, filed a civil-rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the City and County of San Francisco and Sheriff Deputy Khorge. Cooper alleged that, on June 30, 2023, a San Francisco sheriff’s deputy ordered him to carry a 200-pound portable telephone upstairs. He alleged that he fell, the telephone landed on him, his leg was injured, and the deputy did not call for medical assistance. Cooper sought damages.

The court had previously dismissed the original complaint while allowing Cooper to amend it. Cooper then filed an amended complaint identifying Khorge as the deputy who ordered him to carry the telephone. The court treated that filing as a second supplement to the complaint, together with the documents filed at Docket Nos. 6 and 10. The court stated that the complaint in the action consists of those documents.

Screening and claims

Because Cooper sought relief from governmental defendants, the court conducted the required preliminary screening under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. At this stage, the court identifies claims that are legally sufficient and dismisses claims that are frivolous, malicious, inadequately pleaded, or seek money from an immune defendant. The court also said that pleadings filed without a lawyer must be read generously.

The court found that Cooper’s allegations that Khorge ordered him to carry the telephone while knowing he could be injured were sufficient, when read generously, to state an Eighth Amendment claim based on exposure to unsafe conditions. The court noted that the second supplement did not itself include the incident date or a description of Cooper’s injuries, but it treated the filing as another supplement in the interest of justice.

Cooper again named the City and County of San Francisco but made no allegation that the City or County had done anything wrong. The court therefore ordered the Clerk to terminate the City and County as a party because Cooper failed to state a claim for relief against it.

Orders

The court directed the Clerk to send Khorge notice of the lawsuit, service-waiver forms, the complaint and supplements, their attachments, and the order through the San Francisco County Sheriff’s Department’s Office of Chief Legal Counsel. The court also directed the Clerk to send Cooper a copy of the order.

The defendants must file a summary-judgment motion or another dispositive motion concerning the claim found legally sufficient no later than 91 days after the order was filed. Cooper’s opposition will be due 28 days after that motion is filed, and the defendants’ reply will be due 14 days after the opposition. The order also allowed discovery under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and gave instructions concerning service of filings, prosecution of the case, address changes, and requests for extensions of time. The court warned that failing to oppose a summary-judgment motion could lead to judgment against Cooper without a trial.

Judge Edward J. Davila signed the order on June 24, 2024.