Michael R. Green v. Heather Shirley, et al.

Summary

The document contains findings and recommendations in Michael R. Green’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that unsafe levels of 1,2,3-trichloropropane in drinking water at Wasco State Prison violated the Eighth Amendment. The magistrate judge recommends denying Green’s partial motion for summary judgment and granting defendants’ motion for summary judgment, based principally on evidence that the water did not pose a substantial risk of serious harm and that defendants were not deliberately indifferent. The recommendations are subject to objections within thirty days.

Holdings

1. Defendants' motion for summary judgment should be granted because defendants presented sufficient evidence that the TCP levels in Wasco State Prison's water did not pose a substantial risk of serious harm to Green, and Green failed to present admissible evidence creating a genuine dispute of material fact.
2. Green's partial motion for summary judgment should be denied because evidence that TCP levels exceeded California's MCL did not establish, as a matter of law, that the water posed a substantial risk of serious harm under the Eighth Amendment.
3. Green's request to exclude defendants' expert should be denied because Green did not establish that the expert's methodology or opinions were unreliable and did not provide admissible contrary expert or scientific evidence.

Questions Presented

1. Whether defendants were entitled to summary judgment on Green's Eighth Amendment conditions-of-confinement claim because the evidence did not establish that the prison water posed a substantial risk of serious harm.
2. Whether Green was entitled to partial summary judgment based on evidence that TCP levels in Wasco State Prison's water exceeded California's regulatory maximum contaminant level.
3. Whether Green's challenge to defendants' toxicology expert under Daubert and Federal Rule of Evidence 702 warranted exclusion of the expert's opinion.

Disposition

other