Bryant Jr. v. Davis
- Edward Davila
- 5:22-cv-05477
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 5
In Bryant Jr. v. Davis, Judge Davila screened a prisoner’s civil-rights complaint, dismissed two defendants, and ordered service on the remaining defendants.
Ollie L. Bryant Jr. may continue pursuing his Eighth Amendment safety claim against the ten defendants on whom service was ordered. Rob Bonta and Judge Geoffrey Howard were dismissed from the case.
What happened
In Ollie L. Bryant Jr. v. Ronald Davis, et al., a California prisoner alleged that officials transferred 122 prisoners infected with COVID-19 to San Quentin State Prison, causing him to contract COVID-19. He brought the case under a federal civil-rights law.
The court found that the allegations plausibly stated an Eighth Amendment safety claim against all defendants except Rob Bonta and Judge Geoffrey Howard. It dismissed Bonta and Howard because the complaint did not allege that either had a role in the prisoner transfer. The court ordered service on the other defendants and granted Bryant leave to proceed without paying the filing fee by a separate order.
Judge Edward Davila issued an order of service on January 12, 2023. The order began the service process for the remaining defendants but did not decide whether they were ultimately liable.
The detailed version
- Bryant Jr. v. Davis · No. 5:22-cv-05477
- Edward Davila
- Jan. 12, 2023
Background
Ollie L. Bryant Jr., a California prisoner proceeding without a lawyer, filed a civil-rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He alleged that defendants authorized the transfer of approximately 122 prisoners infected with COVID-19 from the California Institution for Men to San Quentin State Prison in May 2020, causing him to contract COVID-19.
The court reviewed the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, which requires an initial screening of a prisoner’s complaint against governmental entities or employees. At screening, the court must identify claims that may proceed and dismiss claims that are frivolous, malicious, inadequately pleaded, or seek money from an immune defendant. The court also explained that § 1983 requires an alleged violation of a federal right by a person acting under state law.
Claims and Screening Ruling
The court construed Bryant’s allegations as asserting an Eighth Amendment claim for deliberate indifference to his safety. Such a claim requires allegations that a prison official knew the prisoner faced a substantial risk of serious harm and disregarded that risk by failing to take reasonable steps to address it.
The court held that the allegations stated a cognizable claim against the following defendants based on their described positions within the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation or at the identified prisons: Ronald Broomfield, Ronald Davis, Kathleen Allison, Clarence Cryer, Allison Pachynski, Shannon Garrigan, Mona Houston, Kirk Torres, Louis Escobell, and Muhammad Faroog.
The court held that Bryant failed to state a cognizable claim against Rob Bonta and Judge Geoffrey Howard because he did not allege that either person played a role in transferring the 122 prisoners. The court DISMISSED Rob Bonta and DISMISSED Geoffrey Howard.
Service and Further Proceedings
The court ORDERED that service proceed on the ten remaining defendants through the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation’s electronic service program for prisoner civil-rights cases. The order directed the Clerk to send the complaint, the order of service, a service-waiver report, and summons materials to the department. It also 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 dispositive motion after resolution of common issues in a related matter identified as No. 22-mc-80066-WHO. The court also instructed Bryant about serving court communications, keeping the court informed of address changes, prosecuting the case, and requesting extensions of time.
Disposition
The order dismissed Rob Bonta and Geoffrey Howard, ordered service on the remaining ten defendants, and stated that Bryant would be granted leave to proceed without paying the filing fee by separate order. Judge Edward Davila did not decide the ultimate merits or liability of the remaining defendants in this screening order.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.