Cooper v. Allison

Background

Kenneth Allan Cooper, a state prisoner housed at San Quentin State Prison, filed this civil-rights action without a lawyer under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against prison and California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation officials. He alleged that on July 25, 2018, while returning to his cell after an alarm, inmate Cucuk attacked him. Cooper alleged that Correctional Officer N. Malikian was present, escorted the attacking inmate, and struck Cooper on the head with a baton as Cooper fell. Cooper received treatment for a head injury.

Cooper attributed the attack to a change in inmate custody classifications that integrated special-needs inmates with general-population inmates. He alleged that the risk of harm was obvious and that officials therefore knew, or should have known, of a substantial danger.

Screening standard

Because Cooper sought relief from government officials, the court was required to screen the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. The court had to identify claims that were legally sufficient and dismiss claims that were frivolous, malicious, failed to state a claim, or sought money from an immune defendant. To state a claim under § 1983, Cooper had to allege both a violation of a federal right and conduct by a person acting under state law.

Court’s analysis

The court applied the Eighth Amendment standard for a failure-to-protect claim. Such a claim requires facts showing that the alleged danger was objectively serious and that the prison official knew of and disregarded an excessive risk to the prisoner’s health or safety.

The court held that Cooper’s allegations against Malikian were speculative. Cooper did not specifically allege that Cucuk intentionally attacked him because Cucuk knew Cooper had formerly been housed in a special-needs group, or that Malikian knew Cooper was likely to be attacked at that time and failed to take protective steps. The incident report instead described Cucuk as running away from an escorted group and attacking Cooper. The court found no indication that Malikian knew Cucuk was likely to escape the escort and assault another inmate. The claim against Malikian was dismissed with leave to amend.

The court also held that Cooper did not allege sufficient individual involvement by Kathleen Allison, the Director of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, or Ralph Diaz, its Secretary. Cooper relied on their responsibility for the department’s overall or day-to-day operations, but the court found no allegation that either official personally caused the alleged constitutional violation. The claims against Allison and Diaz were dismissed.

The court held that Cooper also failed to state a claim against Warden Ron Broomfield. Cooper alleged that Broomfield was responsible for the prison’s operation and inmate welfare, but did not allege that Broomfield personally participated in the incident or engaged in specific wrongful conduct causally connected to the alleged failure to protect. The claim against Broomfield was dismissed with leave to amend.

Disposition

The court dismissed the complaint with leave to amend. Cooper was ordered to file an amended complaint using the court’s form within 28 days from the filing date, addressing the identified deficiencies and attempting to state cognizable claims against Malikian and Broomfield. The order stated that claims or defendants omitted from the amended complaint would no longer be part of the action. It further stated that failure to file the amended complaint as ordered would result in dismissal of the action without prejudice and without further notice.