Coles v. Allison
- Edward Davila
- 5:22-cv-05349
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 6
In Coles v. Allison, Judge Davila allowed an incarcerated plaintiff’s COVID-19 safety claims to proceed, but dismissed official-capacity damages claims.
George E. Coles and the named prison and corrections officials: Kathleen Allison, Ralph Diaz, Ron Davis, Ron Broomfield, J. Clark Kelso, Alison Pachynski, L. Escobell, Clarence Cryer, Dean Borders, and Joseph Bick.
What happened
George E. Coles, a California prisoner representing himself, sued prison officials under a federal civil-rights law. He alleged that officials transferred 122 prisoners, including some infected with COVID-19, to San Quentin State Prison in May 2020, and that he became ill in July 2020.
The court screened the complaint and found that Coles plausibly alleged that all defendants deliberately ignored a serious risk to his safety, violating the Eighth Amendment. The court therefore ordered the claims to be served on the defendants. It dismissed only Coles’s claims for damages against defendants in their official capacities because those claims are barred by the Constitution’s protection for states from certain lawsuits in federal court.
In Coles v. Allison, Judge Edward Davila ordered service to proceed for nine defendants through a prison-department electronic process and separately for Clark Kelso. The order did not decide whether the defendants ultimately violated Coles’s rights.
The detailed version
- Coles v. Allison · No. 5:22-cv-05349
- Edward Davila
- Jan. 11, 2023
Background
George E. Coles, a California prisoner proceeding without a lawyer, brought a civil-rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He alleged that the defendants violated the Eighth Amendment by transferring 122 prisoners from the California Institution for Men to San Quentin State Prison on May 30, 2020. According to the complaint, some transferred prisoners were infected with COVID-19, San Quentin had poor ventilation and open-front cells, and the defendants ignored safety measures. Coles alleged that he became ill with COVID-19 in July 2020.
Coles named Kathleen Allison, Ralph Diaz, Ron Davis, Ron Broomfield, J. Clark Kelso, Alison Pachynski, L. Escobell, Clarence Cryer, Dean Borders, and Joseph Bick. He sued each defendant in both individual and official capacities.
Screening and claims
Because Coles sought relief from government officials, the court screened the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. The court explained that screening requires dismissal of claims that are frivolous, malicious, inadequately pleaded, or seek money from an immune defendant. The court also noted that claims by people without lawyers must be read liberally.
The court held that, when liberally construed, Coles’s allegations stated a legally cognizable Eighth Amendment claim for deliberate indifference to safety against all defendants. A prison official is deliberately indifferent when the official knows that a prisoner faces a substantial risk of serious harm and disregards that risk by failing to take reasonable steps to reduce it. The court found the allegations plausible based on the defendants’ identified positions within the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation or at particular prisons. This was a screening determination, not a final decision on liability.
Official-capacity damages claims
The court dismissed Coles’s claims for damages based on actions taken in the defendants’ official capacities. It relied on the Eleventh Amendment, which generally prevents a person from suing a state in federal court without the state’s consent, and on the rule that an official-capacity suit is treated as a suit against the state or the official’s office. The court’s order dismissed those official-capacity damages claims only; it did not dismiss the complaint in its entirety.
Service and case-management orders
The court ordered service on Ron Broomfield, Ralph Diaz, Ron Davis, Kathleen Allison, Alison Pachynski, L. Escobell, Clarence Cryer, Dean Borders, and Joseph Bick through the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation’s electronic-service program for prisoner civil-rights cases. It ordered service on Clark Kelso separately through electronic delivery to Kelso and his attorney.
The order required the department and the California Attorney General’s Office to submit service-waiver information within the specified deadlines and warned defendants about the potential costs of refusing to waive service. The court stated that it would issue a scheduling order for summary judgment or another case-ending motion after common issues were resolved in a related matter. It also directed Coles to serve his filings on defense counsel, keep the court informed of address changes, and comply with court orders. Judge Edward Davila entered the order on January 10, 2023.
Read the full 6-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.