3:25-cv-05558
N.D. Cal.Aug 27, 2025Background
- Kalann Johnson, a detainee at San Francisco County Jail, filed a pro se civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the San Francisco Sheriff’s Department, alleging constitutional violations.
- Johnson claims deliberate indifference to necessary medical care (follow-up for a staph infection, physical therapy), and states they were attacked by 12 deputies after an attempted sexual assault, resulting in physical harm.
- Plaintiff also alleges being held in 24-hour lockdown without out-of-cell programming, separated from the transgender community, and requests access to recreation, protection from further harm, and medical treatment.
- The court liberally construed the complaint as seeking preliminary injunctive relief and ordered the Sheriff’s Department to respond within 21 days.
- The San Francisco Police Department was dismissed as a defendant due to lack of specific allegations against it.
- The court set a schedule for responsive pleadings, dispositive motions, and ensured pro se litigant protections and procedures were in place.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Deliberate Indifference to Medical Care | Johnson was denied necessary follow-up care and physical therapy | Not stated (response not yet filed) | Stated cognizable claim |
| Use of Excessive Force | Deputies used excessive force after assault in the transgender dorm | Not stated | Stated cognizable claim |
| Conditions of Confinement | 24-hour lockdown, no recreation, segregated from transgender community | Not stated | Stated cognizable claim |
| Dismissal of Police Department | No specific allegations against SFPD | Not applicable (no defense needed) | SFPD dismissed as defendant |
Key Cases Cited
- Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep’t, 901 F.2d 696 (9th Cir. 1988) (standards for liberally construing pro se pleadings)
- West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42 (1988) (elements for liability under Section 1983)
- Lemire v. California Dep’t of Corrections & Rehabilitation, 726 F.3d 1062 (9th Cir. 2013) (causation requirements for Section 1983 liability)
- Leer v. Murphy, 844 F.2d 628 (9th Cir. 1988) (standards for deprivation of constitutional rights under Section 1983)
- Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952 (9th Cir. 1998) (requirements for pro se notice in summary judgment motions)
- Wyatt v. Terhune, 315 F.3d 1108 (9th Cir. 2003) (exhaustion and notice requirements for pro se litigants)
- Woods v. Carey, 684 F.3d 934 (9th Cir. 2012) (timing for providing Rand and Wyatt notices to pro se litigants)
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986) (summary judgment standards regarding burden of proof for non-moving party)