Underwood v. CDCR

Background

Willie Underwood, who was incarcerated at the Correctional Training Facility, sued the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR), Craig Koenig, four unidentified CDCR officials, and additional unidentified CDCR custodial officials. The lawsuit concerned an alleged July 20, 2020 operation at the facility called “Operation Akili.”

According to the complaint, four officers entered Underwood’s cell while he was asleep, dragged him from his bed, slammed him against a wall, restrained him, and took him to a dining hall for holding and questioning. Underwood alleged that he suffered back injuries and remained in pain afterward. He also alleged that officers did not use COVID-19 safety precautions, including masks or social distancing.

Underwood alleged that Koenig, described as the operation’s “singular leader” and the facility’s top prison official, helped carry out the operation. He brought a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal civil-rights law, alleging cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment against the individual defendants. He also alleged that CDCR was responsible for a racially discriminatory physical attack under 42 U.S.C. § 2000(d).

Motion to Dismiss

Koenig and CDCR moved to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). That rule permits dismissal when a complaint does not allege enough facts to support a legally recognized claim. The defendants specifically argued that the complaint did not adequately allege that Koenig used force against Underwood or was liable as a supervisor based on his own actions.

The court explained that a supervisor cannot be held responsible under Section 1983 merely because people under the supervisor committed wrongdoing. A supervisor may instead be liable for the supervisor’s own culpable actions or inaction, acquiescence in a constitutional violation, or reckless or callous indifference to others’ rights.

Ruling

The court found that the complaint sufficiently alleged that Koenig played a direct role in organizing and carrying out Operation Akili and therefore contributed to Underwood’s injuries. The court relied on allegations that Koenig was personally involved and present, was the operation’s “singular leader,” and participated in an operation allegedly designed to injure African-American incarcerated people.

The court concluded that these allegations were sufficient to state a Section 1983 claim against Koenig based on his direct actions and inaction leading to the alleged excessive force. The court denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss. The opinion does not separately analyze the portion of Underwood’s allegations concerning CDCR under 42 U.S.C. § 2000(d).