Gonzalez v. San Mateo County Jail Medical Providers
- Beth Freeman
- 5:19-cv-02404
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 5
In Gonzalez v. San Mateo County Jail Medical Providers, Judge Freeman found a diabetes-care claim cognizable and ordered service and further proceedings.
Simon Hernandez Gonzalez and the defendants, including Carlos Morales and the medical personnel identified in the amended complaint. The order requires service and sets the next litigation steps; it does not determine final liability.
What happened
Simon Hernandez Gonzalez, a state prisoner proceeding without a lawyer, sued medical personnel at the San Mateo County Jail under a federal civil-rights law. He alleged that delayed or incorrect insulin treatment caused serious medical problems.
The court found that Gonzalez stated a valid claim that Carlos Morales, the county correctional-health director, was deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment. Gonzalez may later seek the names of nurses and a primary-care provider through the information-gathering process in the case.
Judge Beth Labson Freeman ordered the clerk to serve Morales and directed the defendants to file a motion for summary judgment or another motion that could resolve the case within 91 days. The order did not decide whether Gonzalez ultimately will win.
The detailed version
- Gonzalez v. San Mateo County Jail Medical Providers · No. 5:19-cv-02404
- Beth Freeman
- Mar. 30, 2020
Background
Simon Hernandez Gonzalez filed this civil-rights case under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 while incarcerated at the California Correctional Institute. He alleged that, during his earlier incarceration at the San Mateo County Jail, medical personnel failed to provide his Type 1 diabetes medication on time or in the proper doses. He identified incidents on February 27, March 14, and June 19, 2018, and alleged that the inadequate care caused sickness, chronic pain, and serious injuries.
Gonzalez also alleged that Carlos Morales, identified as the Director of Correctional Health in San Mateo County, failed to adequately train and supervise subordinate nurses and failed to ensure that Gonzalez received adequate medical care. The court had previously dismissed Gonzalez’s original complaint with permission to amend. Gonzalez then filed an amended complaint.
Screening and Claim
Because Gonzalez is a prisoner suing governmental personnel, the court conducted the required preliminary screening under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. At this stage, the court identifies claims that are legally sufficient to proceed; it does not decide the ultimate truth of the allegations.
The court held that Gonzalez stated a cognizable claim under § 1983 based on alleged deliberate indifference to serious medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment. The court noted that Gonzalez previously had been unable to identify the individual nurses and primary-care provider. It stated that, after Morales is served, Gonzalez may be able to learn those individuals’ names through discovery and seek to add them to the case.
Order
The court ordered the clerk to send Morales the lawsuit materials and a request to waive formal service of the summons. It directed the defendants, no later than 91 days after the order was filed, to file a motion for summary judgment or another dispositive motion concerning the claims found cognizable. A summary-judgment motion asks the court to enter judgment without a trial when the required facts are not genuinely disputed.
The order also set deadlines for Gonzalez’s opposition and the defendants’ reply, authorized discovery under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and instructed Gonzalez to keep the court informed of any address change and to comply with court orders. Judge Beth Labson Freeman did not enter judgment on the merits or otherwise decide whether Gonzalez’s allegations would ultimately be proven.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.