Gould v. California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation

Background

Steven Eric Gould filed this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 while representing himself. He alleged that, between January 18, 2018, and August 2, 2018, he was served expired and spoiled meals through the kosher meal program at Correctional Training Facility. He claimed that ABC Ventures LLC supplied the meals and that prison officials failed to respond adequately to his complaints. Gould alleged violations of the First Amendment’s protection for religious practice, the Eighth Amendment, and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act.

Gould alleged that he received food with dates from 2017 in meal kits labeled for 2018, and that some food was moldy or otherwise spoiled. He said he repeatedly notified correctional staff and submitted written complaints. The defendants disputed that he was served expired or spoiled food. They presented evidence that the meals were frozen, packaged by a kosher-certified vendor, inspected before service, and governed by a system under which a manufacturing-and-freezing date could supersede an internal use-by date.

Default-Judgment Request

Gould requested default judgment against Laurie Marino and ABC Ventures LLC. The court denied the request against both defendants. The Clerk had not entered default, which the court held was required before a motion for default judgment could properly be considered.

As to Marino, the court found that she was served on June 25, 2019, and timely filed a waiver of reply four days later. As to ABC Ventures LLC, the record was unclear whether service complied with the rules for serving a corporation. The court ordered Gould, within 60 days, either to move for entry of default against ABC Ventures LLC and explain how service was completed or to provide enough information for the United States Marshal to complete service. The court stated that failure to meet that deadline would result in dismissal of ABC Ventures LLC from the action without prejudice.

Summary Judgment

The court granted in part and denied in part the motion for summary judgment filed by the Correctional Training Facility defendants: Warden Koenig, Food Administrator Marino, Food Manager Tucker, and Secretary Scott Kernan.

Official-Capacity and Religious Land Use Claims

The court granted summary judgment for the defendants on Gould’s official-capacity claims. It held that the Eleventh Amendment barred those claims because Gould sought compensatory damages rather than prospective injunctive relief. The court dismissed the official-capacity claims with prejudice.

The court also dismissed Gould’s Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act claims with prejudice because those claims were asserted only against defendants in their official capacities, and the official-capacity claims had been dismissed. The order states that the court had previously dismissed the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act claims against defendants in their individual capacities.

Eighth Amendment Claim

The court denied summary judgment on Gould’s Eighth Amendment claim. It explained that prison officials must provide food adequate to maintain prisoners’ health and that serving spoiled food can violate the Eighth Amendment. The court identified triable issues—meaning factual disputes a jury could resolve—about whether Gould was regularly served expired or spoiled food, whether he could obtain safe replacement food, and whether officials knew of and disregarded an excessive risk to his health.

The court found that Gould’s photographs and other evidence created a factual dispute about whether some food was frozen after its stated expiration date. It also found a separate factual dispute about whether food was spoiled, even if it was not expired. Because the court could not resolve those factual disputes or decide witness credibility on summary judgment, it denied the motion as to the Eighth Amendment claim.

First Amendment Claim

The court denied summary judgment on Gould’s First Amendment free-exercise claim. The court stated that the defendants did not dispute that serving expired or spoiled meals would burden Gould’s practice of Judaism without a justification reasonably related to legitimate prison interests. Because factual disputes remained about whether Gould received expired or spoiled food, the court found a triable issue on the First Amendment claim.

The court declined to allow Gould to add new theories raised for the first time in his opposition, including arguments concerning rabbinical approval of the menu, the kosher status of milk, and the freezing process. It found that amendment to add those unsupported allegations would be futile.

Qualified Immunity

The court rejected the defendants’ request for qualified immunity at this stage. Qualified immunity can protect government officials from being held liable for reasonable mistakes, but it does not protect officials when the evidence could show violation of a clearly established constitutional right. The court found factual disputes about whether a constitutional violation occurred and held that, at the time in question, it was clearly established that repeatedly serving an inmate expired or spoiled food after he raised the issue could violate the Constitution. Any qualified-immunity decision therefore depended on resolving disputed facts.

Kernan and Koenig

The court separately dismissed Secretary Kernan and Warden Koenig from the action with prejudice. For a supervisor to be liable under § 1983, the plaintiff must show personal involvement or a sufficient causal connection to the alleged constitutional violation. The court found that Gould had not produced evidence creating a triable issue that either Kernan or Koenig knew about, participated in, or was otherwise liable for the alleged violations. The court found that a grievance reviewed at the third level did not establish that Kernan knew about or participated in the alleged violations while they were occurring, and that the record did not support Gould’s allegations concerning Koenig beyond conclusory statements.

Disposition and Case Status

The court denied Gould’s request for default judgment against Marino and ABC Ventures LLC. It granted in part and denied in part the Correctional Training Facility defendants’ motion for summary judgment: it granted summary judgment on the official-capacity and Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act claims, dismissed those claims with prejudice, and denied summary judgment on the First and Eighth Amendment claims. It dismissed Kernan and Koenig from the action with prejudice.

The court referred the case to Magistrate Judge Robert Illman for settlement proceedings through the Pro Se Prisoner Mediation Program. It stayed further proceedings and administratively closed the case pending those proceedings. The order stated that, if the case was not settled, the court would issue a new scheduling order.