Schrubb v. State of California

Background

Kevin R. Schrubb, identified as a state prisoner at San Quentin State Prison, filed this lawsuit without a lawyer under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He alleged that defendants participated in transferring more than 100 prisoners, some infected with COVID-19, from the California Institution for Men to San Quentin in May 2020. According to the complaint, defendants failed to take adequate precautions, including timely testing and symptom screening, distancing on buses, and testing and isolating prisoners after arrival.

Schrubb alleged that San Quentin went from having no COVID-19 cases to 499 cases over three weeks, later had more than 2,000 prisoner cases, and experienced 26 prisoner deaths. He also alleged inadequate masks and protective equipment, failures to follow public-health recommendations, and refusal of offers of free COVID-19 testing. He alleged that he had several factors that placed him at high risk, including obesity, diabetes, hypertension, diabetic nephropathy, advanced age, glaucoma, and lung damage, and that he contracted COVID-19 around June 20, 2020.

The defendants named in the complaint included the State of California, the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, San Quentin State Prison, Ralph Diaz, the Estate of Robert S. Tharratt, Ronald Davis, Ronald Broomfield, Clarence Cryer, Alison Pachynski, Shannon Garrigan, Louie Escobell, Muhammad Farooq, Kirk Torres, and Does 1 through 20. Schrubb asserted Eighth Amendment claims for deliberate indifference to his medical and safety needs, claims involving familial association and state-created danger, a California Civil Code section 52.1 claim, Rehabilitation Act claims, and a negligent infliction of emotional distress claim.

Screening standard

Because Schrubb was a prisoner suing governmental entities and 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. The court also said that it had to read a self-represented party’s pleadings liberally, while still requiring enough factual information to give defendants fair notice of the claims.

To state a claim under § 1983, a plaintiff must allege that a constitutional or federal legal right was violated by a person acting under state law.

Claims against unidentified defendants

Although Schrubb listed Does 1 through 20, he made no specific allegations about them. The court dismissed the claims against those defendants without prejudice. The court explained that discovery can sometimes be used to identify unknown defendants, but Schrubb had not alleged facts connecting any unidentified defendant to the claimed violations.

Claims the court found legally sufficient

The court found that the allegations about the May 2020 prisoner transfer stated cognizable Eighth Amendment claims against Ralph Diaz, the Estate of Robert S. Tharratt, Ronald Davis, Ronald Broomfield, Clarence Cryer, Alison Pachynski, Shannon Garrigan, Louie Escobell, Muhammad Farooq, and Kirk Torres. A cognizable claim is one that may proceed past the initial screening stage; this finding was not a final decision on liability.

The court also found cognizable Schrubb’s California Civil Code section 52.1 claim, commonly called a Bane Act claim. The court concluded that, when read liberally, the allegations could show that defendants acted with reckless disregard for Schrubb’s constitutional rights, which the court said could satisfy the required specific intent.

The court found a cognizable Rehabilitation Act claim against the State of California, the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, and San Quentin State Prison. Schrubb alleged that these defendants received federal funds, that he had disabilities, and that they failed to provide accommodations such as enhanced protective equipment, changes to the prison environment, cleaning, single-cell housing, and enforcement of distancing and masking measures.

The court also found a cognizable negligent infliction of emotional distress claim against Diaz, the Estate of Tharratt, Davis, Broomfield, Cryer, Pachynski, Garrigan, Escobell, Farooq, Torres, and Does 1 through 20. Although California does not recognize negligent infliction of emotional distress as an independent tort, the court explained that such a claim may proceed when emotional distress results from the breach of another legal duty. It concluded that the alleged prisoner-care duty and alleged exposure to COVID-19 were sufficient at this stage.

Dismissed claims

The court dismissed Schrubb’s familial-association claim without prejudice because he made no specific allegations showing that defendants deprived him of that right. The court noted that prisoners do not have an absolute right to visitation.

The court dismissed the state-created-danger claim. It reasoned that this doctrine concerns an official’s failure to protect a person from harm by third parties, while Schrubb alleged that he was harmed by contracting COVID-19 rather than by third parties. The court also stated that the Eighth Amendment, rather than the Fourteenth Amendment, provides the applicable standard for convicted prisoners’ conditions-of-confinement claims.

Disposition and next steps

The court ordered that service proceed through the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation’s electronic service program for the named defendants. It directed the Clerk to send the complaint, the order, a summons, and a service-waiver form to the department and established procedures for serving defendants who did not waive service.

The court stated that it would issue a scheduling order for summary judgment or another case-ending motion after resolution of common issues in another proceeding identified by docket number 22-mc-80066-WHO. It also directed Schrubb to serve documents on opposing counsel or, until counsel was designated, on the defendants, and to comply with deadlines and address-reporting requirements.