Rodriguez v. Kelly
- Beth Freeman
- 5:19-cv-06755
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 4
In Rodriguez v. Kelly, Judge Freeman dismissed Rodriguez’s amended civil-rights complaint for failing to state a claim.
Michael Rodriguez’s amended civil-rights complaint was dismissed; the order concerns allegations against Nurse Kelly and other defendants listed in the caption.
What happened
Michael Rodriguez, a California state prisoner proceeding without a lawyer, sued Nurse Kelly under a federal civil-rights law. He alleged that Kelly withheld his medication and verbally disrespected him because of his sexuality and race.
The court had previously told Rodriguez that verbal harassment alone generally does not support a federal civil-rights claim. It also explained that he needed to provide facts showing a serious medical need and that Kelly knowingly disregarded a substantial risk of serious harm. Rodriguez’s amended complaint repeated the earlier allegations without adding those facts.
Judge Beth Labson Freeman dismissed the amended complaint because it did not state a claim for which relief could be granted. The court dismissed it without allowing another amendment.
The detailed version
- Rodriguez v. Kelly · No. 5:19-cv-06755
- Beth Freeman
- Sept. 29, 2020
Background
Michael Rodriguez, identified as a California state prisoner, filed this lawsuit without a lawyer under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law allowing claims against people acting under state law for violating federal rights. The complaint named a nurse at Salinas Valley State Prison and alleged that the nurse did not give Rodriguez medication and verbally disrespected him based on his sexuality and race.
The court previously dismissed Rodriguez’s original complaint while allowing him to amend it. The court explained that verbal harassment and abuse generally do not state a § 1983 claim, even when the harassment is racially motivated. It also explained that harassment connected with conduct violating the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment might support a claim. For a medical-care claim, Rodriguez needed to allege facts showing a serious medical need, that Nurse Kelly knew he faced a substantial risk of serious harm without the medication, and that Kelly disregarded that risk.
Amended Complaint and Analysis
Rodriguez’s amended complaint stated, in full, that Nurse Kelly did not give him medication and went into a rage while verbally disrespecting his sexuality and race. The court found that this statement did not correct the deficiencies identified in the original complaint. It concluded that Rodriguez still had not alleged sufficient facts to support an Eighth Amendment claim or a claim based on verbal harassment and abuse.
Disposition
The court dismissed the amended complaint for failure to state a claim for which relief could be granted. It dismissed the amended complaint without leave to amend, explaining that Rodriguez had already received one opportunity to amend and that the court found no good cause to grant another opportunity.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.