Bryant A. Reagor v. Losacco

Background

Bryant A. Reagor, an inmate at California State Prison — Substance Abuse Treatment and Facility in Corcoran Prison, filed this action without a lawyer. He alleged that, while housed at Pelican Bay State Prison (PBSP), he was denied kosher meals. He asserted a First Amendment free-exercise claim and a claim under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA), 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc-1. He sought declaratory relief, damages, costs, attorney’s fees, and other relief.

Reagor alleged that he requested a kosher diet on August 27, 2018, and that PBSP Community Resource Manager Robert Losacco denied the request on October 10, 2018. He also described grievance decisions by PBSP Warden Jim Robertson and California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation Litigation Coordinator Voong. After transferring to Salinas Valley State Prison, Reagor submitted another kosher-diet request on May 17, 2019, which staff granted on June 12, 2019. Reagor alleged that the earlier denial occurred because he is Black and the defendants are white. He also named PBSP Appeals Coordinator W. Coleman, but alleged Coleman was responsible only because of his supervisory position.

Screening standards

Because Reagor was a prisoner seeking relief from government officials, the court reviewed the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. That screening process requires the court to identify claims that can proceed and dismiss claims that are frivolous, malicious, inadequately pleaded, or seek money from an immune defendant. The court also applied the requirement that a complaint provide enough factual matter to make a claim plausible rather than merely stating labels or conclusions.

For a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege both a violation of a federal right and action by a person acting under state law.

Court’s analysis and rulings

The court dismissed Reagor’s request for declaratory relief with prejudice. Because Reagor was no longer housed at PBSP, the court ruled that he lacked standing to seek a declaration concerning conditions at that facility.

The court also dismissed the RLUIPA claims with prejudice. It stated that declaratory relief was unavailable because Reagor no longer lived at PBSP and that RLUIPA does not authorize money damages against state officials.

The court dismissed the First Amendment free-exercise claim with leave to amend. It explained that Reagor had not alleged facts from which it could reasonably infer that the denial of a kosher diet was based solely on racial bias. The later approval of his request at Salinas Valley State Prison did not establish that inference because the complaint suggested that the two facilities relied on different assessments of his understanding of kosher practices and the Jewish religion. The court also noted that the Prison Litigation Reform Act requires a prisoner seeking damages for mental or emotional injuries suffered while incarcerated to first show a physical injury.

The court dismissed W. Coleman from the action but granted Reagor leave to amend his claim against Coleman. The complaint did not allege that Coleman was directly involved in the asserted constitutional violation. The court explained that a supervisor is not liable under § 1983 merely because of responsibility for another person’s actions or omissions; the plaintiff must allege personal involvement or a sufficient causal connection to the violation.

Disposition

The court’s conclusion was that the RLUIPA claim and request for declaratory relief were dismissed with prejudice; the First Amendment claim was dismissed with leave to amend; and W. Coleman was dismissed from the action, with leave to amend the claim against him. Reagor was ordered to file an amended complaint within 28 days. The amended complaint had to replace the earlier complaint and include all claims and defendants he wished to pursue.