O'Neal v. Allison

Background

Michael Sr. O’Neal, 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 more than 100 prisoners from the California Institution for Men to San Quentin State Prison in May 2020, including prisoners who were infected with COVID-19.

O’Neal alleged that officials failed to take adequate precautions before, during, and after the transfer. The alleged failures included not testing or properly screening transferring prisoners, failing to maintain social distancing on transfer buses, and failing to test and isolate prisoners after they arrived at San Quentin. He also alleged that San Quentin had poor ventilation, close living quarters, inadequate sanitation, and overcrowding. O’Neal alleged that he experienced COVID-19 symptoms and tested positive on June 24, 2020.

He sued Kathleen Allison, Ralph Diaz, Ron Davis, Ron Broomfield, Clark Kelso, Alison Pachynski, L. Escobell, R. Steven Tharratt, Clarence Cryer, Dean Borders, and Joseph Bick in both their individual and official capacities. He sought declaratory relief, an injunction, compensatory and punitive damages, and costs.

Screening and legally sufficient claims

Because O’Neal was a prisoner seeking relief from government officials, the court was required to screen the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. At this stage, 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 held that, when read liberally, O’Neal’s allegations stated a cognizable Eighth Amendment claim for deliberate indifference to his safety against the defendants. Deliberate indifference means that a prison official knew about a serious risk to a prisoner’s safety and failed to take reasonable steps to address it. The court’s screening conclusion allowed the claims to proceed at this stage; it did not decide whether O’Neal would ultimately prevail.

Official-capacity damages claims

The court dismissed O’Neal’s claims for damages based on defendants’ actions in their official capacities. It explained that the Eleventh Amendment generally bars a person from suing a state in federal court without the state’s consent. State officials sued in their official capacities are treated as representing the state, and the court therefore concluded that the Eleventh Amendment barred the official-capacity damages claims.

Claim against Tharratt

The court also dismissed O’Neal’s complaint against Tharratt. Based on information presented to another court, including an obituary, the court understood that Tharratt died on August 20, 2020. Because that death occurred before this action was filed, the court concluded that Tharratt could not be made a party to this federal lawsuit in his own right.

Disposition and service

The court ordered the following:

- It dismissed O’Neal’s claims for damages based on defendants’ official-capacity actions as barred by the Eleventh Amendment. - It dismissed Tharratt. - It 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 by electronic transmission to Kelso and his attorney. - It stated that permission for O’Neal to proceed without paying filing fees would be granted by separate order. - It stated that a scheduling order for summary judgment or another case-ending motion would issue after resolution of common issues in another matter.

The order also gave instructions about service, communications with the court, prosecuting the case, address changes, and requests for extensions of time.