Cuellar v. The Madera County Sheriff Jail Division, et al.

Summary

The court recommends dismissing Travis Justin Cuellar’s pro se § 1983 action against the Madera County Sheriff Jail Division, Homewav, and Doe defendants. The recommendations conclude that Cuellar failed to allege personal injury, a proper municipal defendant, state action by Homewav, or a viable due process claim, and also failed to prosecute the case or comply with a screening order. The court recommends dismissal with prejudice and advises that objections may be filed within thirty days.

Holdings

1. Plaintiff could not pursue claims belonging to his loved ones or other inmates because he did not allege that he personally suffered the alleged financial injury, and a pro se litigant may not represent other persons in a class action.
2. The Madera County Jail was not a proper § 1983 defendant, and the complaint did not allege specific facts showing that the Jail caused the alleged video calls or participated in a constitutional conspiracy.
3. The complaint failed to state a § 1983 claim against Homewav because contracting with the Jail to provide video services, without more, did not establish that Homewav acted under color of state law.
4. Plaintiff failed to state a due process claim because he did not allege that he personally was deprived of property, did not allege an authorized deprivation pursuant to established state procedure, and did not identify personal participation by a defendant.
5. Dismissal was appropriate under the applicable five-factor analysis because Plaintiff failed to respond to the screening order despite a warning that noncompliance could result in dismissal.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the complaint stated a cognizable claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
2. Whether Plaintiff had standing to assert claims on behalf of his loved ones and other inmates when he did not allege a personal injury.
3. Whether the Madera County Jail was a proper defendant or was sufficiently connected to the alleged conduct under § 1983.
4. Whether Homewav was alleged to have acted under color of state law merely because it contracted with the Jail.
5. Whether the complaint alleged a constitutional due process violation based on allegedly unauthorized charges for unsolicited video calls.
6. Whether dismissal was warranted for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with the court's screening order.

Disposition

other