In re CIM-SQ Transfer Cases

Summary

The United States District Court for the Northern District of California granted a prisoner-plaintiff’s motion to reopen his case concerning the May 2020 transfer of prisoners from California Institution for Men to San Quentin State Prison during the COVID-19 pandemic. The court found cognizable Eighth Amendment, California Bane Act, negligent infliction of emotional distress, and Rehabilitation Act claims, ordered service, and stayed the case for purposes other than service.

Holdings

1. The motion to reopen was granted because it was accompanied by an application to proceed in forma pauperis, and the case was screened under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.
2. The allegations concerning the May 2020 prisoner transfer stated cognizable Eighth Amendment claims against the identified individual defendants for deliberate indifference to plaintiff's health and safety needs.
3. The complaint, liberally construed, stated a cognizable Bane Act claim because it alleged that defendants acted with reckless disregard for plaintiff's constitutional rights.
4. The complaint stated a cognizable Rehabilitation Act claim against the State of California, CDCR, and San Quentin State Prison.
5. The complaint stated a cognizable negligent infliction of emotional distress claim under California law.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the plaintiff's motion to reopen should be granted after he submitted an application to proceed in forma pauperis.
2. Whether the complaint stated cognizable claims under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A against the individual defendants for Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference.
3. Whether the complaint stated a cognizable claim under California Civil Code section 52.1.
4. Whether the complaint stated a cognizable Rehabilitation Act claim against the State of California, CDCR, and San Quentin State Prison.
5. Whether the complaint stated a cognizable negligent infliction of emotional distress claim under California law.

Disposition

other