Williams v. Prudhel

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California grants Bobby James Williams leave to proceed in forma pauperis but requires payment of the statutory filing fee. The court dismisses the complaint for failure to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, while granting thirty days to file an amended complaint. The order also provides guidance concerning pleading requirements, defendant involvement, and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Holdings

1. The complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted and was subject to dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.
2. Plaintiff was granted thirty days to file an amended complaint that complies with the Civil Rights Act, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and the Local Rules of Practice.
3. To establish a Title II ADA violation, a plaintiff must allege that he is a qualified individual with a disability, was excluded from or discriminated against regarding a public entity's services, programs, or activities, and suffered that exclusion or discrimination because of the disability.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the complaint stated a claim for relief under federal law sufficient to survive mandatory screening under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.
2. Whether the plaintiff's allegations adequately connected each defendant to an alleged constitutional deprivation under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
3. What pleading requirements applied to any amended complaint, including the requirements for asserting a Title II ADA claim and filing a complete amended pleading.

Disposition

dismissed