Cone v. Gamble, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California severs Plaintiff Chris Monroe Cone’s excessive-force claim against Defendant Lopez from the action involving Defendant Gamble III because the claims arise from separate incidents at different institutions and are not properly joined. The Court directs the Clerk to open a separate action for the Lopez claim and orders Plaintiff to pay the filing fee or seek in forma pauperis status within 30 days.

Holdings

1. Claims against different defendants may be joined only when they arise out of the same transaction or occurrence, or a series of transactions or occurrences, and present common questions of law or fact. The two excessive-force claims, arising from separate incidents four months apart at different prisons, did not satisfy that requirement.
2. Rule 18(a) permits multiple claims against the same party only after the defendants are properly joined under Rule 20(a); unrelated claims against different defendants may not be maintained in a single action merely because they involve the same type of constitutional violation.
3. The claim against Lopez was properly severed under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 21 and ordered to proceed in a separately opened action.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Cone's excessive-force claims against Gamble III and Lopez arose from the same transaction or occurrence, or a series of related transactions or occurrences, so that the defendants were properly joined under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 20(a)(2).
2. Whether the claims could proceed together under Rule 18(a), and if not, whether the Lopez claim should be severed under Rule 21.

Disposition

other