(PC) Lipsey v. Norum
2:18-cv-00362
E.D. Cal.Mar 30, 2015Background
- Plaintiff Christopher Lipsey, a state prisoner, sued Pelican Bay officials under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging deliberate indifference to serious medical needs (sleep deprivation from a suicide-prevention device) and denial of access to the courts; he also had a separate claim about missing legal papers against Warden Barnes.
- The Court previously found a cognizable Eighth Amendment claim against Dr. Vance Norum and a cognizable claim against Barnes for failing to deliver three boxes of legal papers; Lipsey later received the papers and moved to withdraw that claim.
- The original complaint was screened; the Court found the sleep-deprivation and access-to-courts claims defective in various respects and invited amendment.
- Lipsey filed an amended complaint asserting that Sgt. Evert, Counselor A. Bond, Warden Ducart, Appeals Examiner Benavidez, Chief of Appeals Lozano, and CDCR Secretary Beard knew of the device-caused sleep deprivation via administrative appeals and did nothing.
- The amended record (including appeal responses and a law-library inquiry response) showed: (1) Bond merely interviewed Lipsey (insufficient for deliberate indifference), (2) several officials denied administrative appeals (sufficient to allege knowledge), and (3) the law library had relevant federal and California reports (undercutting the access-to-courts claim).
- Procedurally, the Court: granted leave to file the amended complaint; dismissed with prejudice the sleep-deprivation claim as to Bond and Beard and the access-to-courts claim as to all defendants; allowed an Eighth Amendment deliberate-indifference claim to proceed against Evert, Ducart, Benavidez, and Lozano; directed service steps for those defendants and personal service on Norum; and set a dispositive briefing schedule.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Eighth Amendment — sleep deprivation from suicide-prevention device | Lipsey: device woke him every 15 minutes, causing serious sleep deprivation; appeals show officials knew and failed to act | Defendants: (as argued or shown) some officials only processed appeals or interviewed; no allegation of deliberate indifference by some defendants | Court: Claim sufficiently alleged against Evert, Ducart, Benavidez, Lozano (deliberate indifference); dismissed with prejudice as to Bond and Beard |
| First Amendment / Access to Courts — inadequate law library | Lipsey: library deficiencies prevented filing and responding in other cases, caused dismissal of a claim | Defendants: library had online and print access to California Reports and Federal Reporter through vol. 357; staff could print cites from computer | Court: Access-to-courts claim fails; dismissed with prejudice for all defendants |
| Service on Dr. Norum | Lipsey: sought service on Norum as defendant | N/A (Marshal/defense logistical issue) | Court: Ordered personal service by Marshal at Norum’s current address and set return/report deadline |
| Motion re: Barnes / preliminary injunction | Lipsey: claimed missing legal papers and sought injunction | Lipsey later notified Court he received papers | Court: Granted Lipsey’s request to withdraw claim; claim dismissed and injunction denied as moot |
Key Cases Cited
- West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42 (establishes § 1983 liability for actions under color of state law)
- Lemire v. California Dep’t of Corrections & Rehabilitation, 726 F.3d 1062 (personal and proximate causation standards for § 1983)
- Leer v. Murphy, 844 F.2d 628 (affirmative acts/omissions sufficient for § 1983 liability)
- Taylor v. List, 880 F.2d 1040 (no respondeat superior liability under § 1983)
- Miles v. Prunty, 187 F.3d 1104 (equitable tolling may apply when external forces prevent timely filing)
- Woods v. Carey, 684 F.3d 934 (requirements for opposing summary judgment in prisoner civil-rights cases)
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (summary judgment burden-shifting rules)