David D. Harris v. Nurse Richmond; Dr. Blaisdell

Summary

The United States District Court for the Southern District of California vacates the prior judgment, reopens David D. Harris’s § 1983 action, and grants him leave to proceed in forma pauperis. The court dismisses the complaint under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2) and 1915A(b) for failure to plausibly allege deliberate indifference to serious medical needs, while granting leave to amend.

Holdings

1. A prisoner may proceed in forma pauperis after submitting the required certified trust-account statement, subject to payment of the statutory filing fee through the partial initial payment and installment mechanism in 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b).
2. The complaint failed to plausibly allege that either defendant acted with deliberate indifference to a serious medical need; allegations of negligence, medical malpractice, or a difference of opinion regarding treatment do not, without more, state an Eighth Amendment claim.
3. A plaintiff's mere speculation that a defendant acted out of malice or retaliation is insufficient to state a plausible claim.
4. A pro se plaintiff should ordinarily receive leave to amend unless it is absolutely clear that the complaint's deficiencies cannot be cured by amendment.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the court properly granted Harris leave to proceed in forma pauperis after he submitted a certified prison trust-account statement.
2. Whether the complaint plausibly alleged an Eighth Amendment deliberate-indifference claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Nurse Richmond or Dr. Blaisdell.
3. Whether the complaint should be dismissed under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2) and 1915A(b) for failure to state a claim, and whether Harris should receive leave to amend.

Disposition

dismissed