Chestra v. Brodie

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California screens Robert Chestra’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint concerning alleged deductions from his inmate trust account. The court concludes that the alleged unauthorized deprivation of property does not state a Fourteenth Amendment due process claim because California provides an adequate post-deprivation remedy, and that no private cause of action exists for extortion. The magistrate judge recommends dismissal without leave to amend and directs the clerk to assign a district judge.

Holdings

1. The alleged random and unauthorized deprivation of plaintiff's property did not state a procedural due process claim because California provides an adequate post-deprivation remedy through the Government Claims Act.
2. Plaintiff failed to state a civil extortion claim because he had no private cause of action against the defendants under the criminal extortion statutes.
3. Dismissal without leave to amend was appropriate because amendment would be futile.

Questions Presented

1. Whether alleged unauthorized deductions from a state prisoner's inmate trust account stated a Fourteenth Amendment procedural due process claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
2. Whether the plaintiff could maintain a private civil extortion claim against the defendants under federal criminal statutes.
3. Whether amendment would be futile such that dismissal should occur without leave to amend.

Disposition

remanded