(PC) Shavers v. Taber
2:21-cv-01734
E.D. Cal.Apr 9, 2024Background
- Plaintiff Jesse Lee Shavers, Jr., a pro se state prisoner, filed a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against multiple prison officials, alleging violations related to the withdrawal of prescribed medical equipment.
- The operative complaint (third amended) was screened by a magistrate judge, who recommended dismissal of all claims for failure to state a cognizable claim.
- Plaintiff alleged correctional officer Kelsey made false, racially motivated statements leading Dr. Taber to discontinue Shavers' medical equipment without proper evaluation.
- New evidence was submitted by Shavers in objections, including documentation showing Dr. Taber withdrew equipment following Kelsey's report and later accommodation and classification chronos supporting the medical necessity for the equipment.
- The district court conducted de novo review and partially adopted the magistrate’s recommendations: dismissing claims against Bassett and the Warden with prejudice, but allowing Kelsey and Taber claims to be amended based on new evidence.
- Plaintiff was given 30 days to file an amended complaint against Kelsey and Dr. Taber; failure to do so would result in dismissal for failure to state a claim.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether claims against Bassett and Warden state a cognizable claim | Defendants responsible for violation of plaintiff’s rights | Plaintiff failed to allege specific, actionable conduct | Dismissed with prejudice |
| Sufficiency of claims against Kelsey and Dr. Taber | Kelsey's alleged racism led to loss of needed medical equipment | Allegations too vague, no clear misconduct detailed | Dismissed with leave to amend due to new factual allegations |
| Dismissal with or without leave to amend | Plaintiff can plausibly plead facts to support claim if allowed | Case should be dismissed with prejudice | Leave to amend granted for claims against Kelsey and Taber |
| Consideration of newly submitted evidence | Additional evidence shows wrongful withdrawal of medical equipment | Not properly before court, not in operative complaint | Court considers new evidence for the purpose of amendment |
Key Cases Cited
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (sets the pleading standard for sufficient factual matter to state a claim)
- Cook, Perkiss & Liehe, Inc. v. N. Cal. Collection Serv., Inc., 911 F.2d 242 (9th Cir. 1990) (standard for dismissals where the pleading could not possibly be cured by amendment)
- Lacey v. Maricopa County, 693 F.3d 896 (9th Cir. 2012) (filing an amended complaint supersedes prior complaints, requiring all claims to be reasserted therein)