Myers v. Posson

Background

Christopher W. Myers, proceeding without a lawyer, brought a civil-rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against prison officials. He alleged that officials at CTF-Soledad violated the Eighth Amendment by placing him in COVID-19 quarantine on March 6, 2022, even though he tested negative that day. He also alleged that the quarantine area was not intended for housing, lacked air circulation, endangered his health, and increased his chances of contracting COVID-19.

The complaint and an attached grievance response stated that Myers tested positive for COVID-19 on March 5, was moved to quarantine on March 6, and was released from quarantine on March 17.

Screening and Analysis

Because Myers was a prisoner seeking relief from governmental officials, the court reviewed the complaint under the federal prisoner-screening statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. At this stage, the court must dismiss claims that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a legally sufficient claim, or seek money from an immune defendant. The court also applied the rule that a complaint must include enough factual matter to make liability plausible.

The court concluded that Myers’s allegations did not show deliberate indifference to a serious medical need. Although Myers tested negative on the first day of quarantine, the court determined that quarantining him after his positive test the previous day was a reasonable response to the risks that he could remain contagious or relapse.

The court separately found that Myers did not allege specific facts showing that either of the two defendants placed or kept him in quarantine or controlled the conditions of the quarantine area. The court explained that a civil-rights claim requires facts linking each defendant personally to the alleged constitutional violation. It also found that merely supervising other employees was not enough to establish liability for S. Posson.

Disposition

The court dismissed the complaint with leave to file an amended complaint on or before October 23, 2023. The amended complaint had to use the required caption and case number, be filed on the court’s form, include all claims and defendants Myers wished to pursue, and not incorporate the prior complaint by reference. The court warned that failure to file a proper amended complaint by the deadline might result in dismissal of the action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute.