(PC) Martinez v. Selma Police Department, 1:13-cv-00183

Background

Plaintiff Sonny Martinez, a pro se, in forma pauperis movant, filed this §1983 action on February 6, 2013.
Action arises from events at the City of Selma Jail, with Selma Police Department named as the sole defendant.
Plaintiff alleges he attempted to hang himself in his jail cell on January 20, 2013, and received no timely assistance despite a nearby camera.
Plaintiff argues the failure to aid constitutes a constitutional deprivation and seeks an investigation thereof.
Court screened the complaint under 28 U.S.C. §1915A and §1915(e)(2), and found it fails to state a claim, but granted leave to amend.
Amended complaint due within 30 days to cure deficiencies.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the Selma Police Department can be sued under §1983 as a municipal entity	Martinez contends the department's failure to aid constitutes a policy/constitutional violation	Department cannot be liable without establishing a policy, custom, or deliberate indifference	Plaintiff fails to plead a cognizable Monell claim; leave to amend granted
Whether a Fourteenth Amendment conditions-of-confinement claim is stated	Martinez asserts inadequate monitoring breached due process	Plaintiff fails to link to any individual and shows no professional standard departure	Claim deficient; amended complaint required to link individuals and show substantial professional departure
Whether Plaintiff is entitled to injunctive relief	Martinez seeks investigation into the incident by the Selma Police Department	Court lacks jurisdiction to compel unnamed third parties and relief is improper absent meritorious claims	Injunctive relief denied as unwarranted at screening; leave to amend noted
Whether the complaint states a claim under §1983 for relief	Martinez seeks relief for alleged deprivation of rights	Complaint fails to plead plausible claims and damages	Complaint dismissed for failure to state a claim; amendment permitted
Whether the amended complaint can be a complete and non-redundant replacement	Amendment should cure deficiencies without introducing unrelated claims		Amendment must be complete in itself and supercede prior pleading

Key Cases Cited

Wilder v. Virginia Hosp. Ass’n, 496 U.S. 498 (1990) (standard for §1983 claims; rights conferred elsewhere; color of state law)
Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989) (exposing that §1983 provides a method to vindicate federal rights)
West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42 (1988) (two essential elements of §1983 claim; right and state action)
Ketchum v. Alameda Cnty., 811 F.2d 1243 (9th Cir. 1987) (analytical framework for §1983 claims in California)
Monell v. Dep't of Soc. Servs., 436 U.S. 658 (1978) (municipal liability requires policy or custom causing violation)
Long v. Cnty. of Los Angeles, 442 F.3d 1178 (9th Cir. 2006) (policy or custom required for municipal liability)
Oviatt v. Pearce, 954 F.2d 1470 (9th Cir. 1992) (moving force behind violation necessary)
Youngberg v. Romeo, 457 U.S. 307 (1982) (civil detainees entitled to safe conditions and professional care)
Jones v. Blanas, 393 F.3d 918 (9th Cir. 2004) (due process protections for civil detainees; professional judgment standard)
City of Los Angeles v. Lyons, 461 U.S. 95 (1983) (requirements for standing and likelihood of irreparable injury in injunctions)
Winter v. NRDC, 555 U.S. 7 (2008) (preliminary injunction standard and balancing of equities)
Munaf v. Geren, 553 U.S. 674 (2008) (injunction standards; four-part test)
Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122 (9th Cir. 2000) (sentence-completion of prior pleading; amendment standards)
Noll v. Carlson, 809 F.2d 1356 (9th Cir. 1987) (requirements for pleading and amendment)
Twombly v. Bell Atl. Corp., 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (plausibility standard for complaint)
Iqbal v. Ashcroft, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (plausibility requirement for factual allegations)