Mouzon v. Alameda County

Mouzon · United States District Court for the Northern District of California · October 3, 2025 · No. 24-cv-01907-DMR (PR)

Summary

The United States District Court for the Northern District of California issued an order of service in Alfonso Mouzon’s § 1983 action against Alameda County. The court held that the amended complaint stated cognizable Fourteenth Amendment due process and Monell policy-based claims concerning conditions of confinement for civil detainees housed at the Alameda County Jail, and directed service and established case-management procedures.

Holdings

  1. Liberally construed, the allegations were sufficient to state a cognizable claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 that the conditions imposed on Mouzon as a civil detainee denied him protections guaranteed by the Due Process Clause.
  2. The amended complaint stated a cognizable policy-based municipal-liability claim against Alameda County under Monell.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the amended complaint plausibly alleged that conditions imposed on Mouzon as a civil detainee were punitive or otherwise violated the Due Process Clause.
  2. Whether the amended complaint plausibly alleged municipal liability against Alameda County under Monell based on an unconstitutional policy, custom, or practice.
  3. Whether the court should order service of the amended complaint after finding the claims cognizable under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.

Disposition

other

Cases Cited (14)

  • Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Department, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1990)(applied)
  • Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 93 (2007)(applied)
  • Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555, 570 (2007)(applied)
  • Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 679 (2009)(applied)
  • West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988)(applied)
  • Jones v. Blanas, 393 F.3d 918, 934-35 (9th Cir. 2004)(applied)
  • Monell v. Department of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658, 690-91 (1978)(applied)
  • Taylor v. List, 880 F.2d 1040, 1045 (9th Cir. 1989)(applied)
  • Plumeau v. School District #40 County of Yamhill, 130 F.3d 432, 438 (9th Cir. 1997)(applied)
  • AE v. County of Tulare, 666 F.3d 631, 636-37 (9th Cir. 2012)(applied)

Showing top 10 of 14.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…