Flournoy v. Marin County
- Charles Breyer
- 3:23-cv-01942
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Flournoy v. Marin County, Judge Breyer dismissed the prisoner’s civil-rights action without prejudice after he failed to amend his complaint.
James Henry Flournoy’s federal civil-rights action against Marin County, its listed agencies, and the individual jail officials was dismissed without prejudice because he did not file the required amended complaint or request more time.
What happened
James Henry Flournoy, a prisoner at the Marin County Jail, sued Marin County and officials over the discontinuation of his Suboxone and Wellbutrin prescriptions and alleged retaliation. He represented himself and brought the case under a federal civil-rights law.
The court had previously dismissed the complaint but allowed Flournoy 28 days to file an amended complaint with specific facts supporting his claims. More than 40 days passed, and he neither amended the complaint nor requested more time.
In Flournoy v. Marin County, Judge Charles R. Breyer dismissed the action without prejudice and directed the clerk to close the case and treat pending motions as moot.
The detailed version
- Flournoy v. Marin County · No. 3:23-cv-01942
- Charles Breyer
- July 17, 2023
Background
James Henry Flournoy, a prisoner at the Marin County Jail, filed a complaint without a lawyer under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law allowing claims against state or local officials for certain constitutional violations. He alleged that several jail officials were deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs when his Suboxone prescription for opioid addiction was discontinued after he arrived at the jail from Alameda County Jail. He also alleged that another jail official discontinued his Wellbutrin prescription for depression.
Flournoy additionally alleged that officials took retaliatory actions because he had filed an earlier federal case concerning the discontinuation of Suboxone and Wellbutrin. He named nearly a dozen individual jail officials, as well as Marin County, the Marin County Board of Supervisors, the Marin County Sheriff’s Department, and the Marin County Department of Health and Human Services.
Earlier Order and Failure to Amend
On June 7, 2023, the court gave Flournoy an opportunity to file an amended complaint concerning his medical-care and retaliation claims against specified defendants and any other viable claims against those defendants. The court instructed him to file a separate action concerning unrelated claims against Dr. Quezada.
The court had dismissed the complaint with leave to amend, meaning Flournoy was allowed to try again. It instructed him to provide specific facts showing how each individual defendant was deliberately indifferent to his health and safety or committed First Amendment retaliation. The court also explained that, in a § 1983 case, an official generally can be liable only for that official’s own misconduct, and a local government or agency can be liable only when an official policy or custom caused the constitutional violation.
The court gave Flournoy 28 days to file an amended complaint and warned that failing to do so would result in dismissal. More than 40 days passed, and Flournoy did not file an amended complaint or ask for an extension of time.
Disposition
The court accordingly dismissed the action without prejudice. The order also directed the clerk to close the file and terminate all pending motions as moot. The opinion does not decide the underlying medical-care or retaliation claims.
Judge Charles R. Breyer signed the order on July 17, 2023.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.