Jamison v. Progressive Insurance et al

Filing 4

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 4/30/2015 GRANTING plaintiff's 2 request to proceed IFP. Plaintiff shall pay the $350.00 filing fee in accordance with the concurrent CDCR order. Plaintiff's complaint is DISMISSED with leave to file an amended complaint within 30 days. (Yin, K)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

JEREMY L. JAMISON,

12
13
14

No. 2:15-cv-0848 KJN P

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

PROGRESSIVE INSURANCE, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
17

Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding without counsel. Plaintiff seeks relief pursuant to

18

42 U.S.C. § 1983, and has requested leave to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

19

§ 1915. This proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 302 pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

20

§ 636(b)(1).

21
22
23

Plaintiff submitted a declaration that makes the showing required by 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(a). Accordingly, the request to proceed in forma pauperis will be granted.
Plaintiff is required to pay the statutory filing fee of $350.00 for this action.

24

28 U.S.C. §§ 1914(a), 1915(b)(1). By this order, plaintiff will be assessed an initial partial filing

25

fee in accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). By separate order, the court will

26

direct the appropriate agency to collect the initial partial filing fee from plaintiff’s trust account

27

and forward it to the Clerk of the Court. Thereafter, plaintiff will be obligated to make monthly

28

payments of twenty percent of the preceding month’s income credited to plaintiff’s trust account.

1

These payments will be forwarded by the appropriate agency to the Clerk of the Court each time

2

the amount in plaintiff’s account exceeds $10.00, until the filing fee is paid in full. 28 U.S.C.

3

§ 1915(b)(2).

4

The court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against a

5

governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The

6

court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are legally

7

“frivolous or malicious,” that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek

8

monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1),(2).

9

A claim is legally frivolous when it lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact.

10

Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989); Franklin v. Murphy, 745 F.2d 1221, 1227-28 (9th

11

Cir. 1984). The court may, therefore, dismiss a claim as frivolous when it is based on an

12

indisputably meritless legal theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Neitzke,

13

490 U.S. at 327. The critical inquiry is whether a constitutional claim, however inartfully

14

pleaded, has an arguable legal and factual basis. See Jackson v. Arizona, 885 F.2d 639, 640 (9th

15

Cir. 1989), superseded by statute as stated in Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1130-31 (9th Cir.

16

2000) (“[A] judge may dismiss [in forma pauperis] claims which are based on indisputably

17

meritless legal theories or whose factual contentions are clearly baseless.”); Franklin, 745 F.2d at

18

1227.

19

Rule 8(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure “requires only ‘a short and plain

20

statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief,’ in order to ‘give the

21

defendant fair notice of what the . . . claim is and the grounds upon which it rests.’” Bell Atlantic

22

Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007) (quoting Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 47 (1957)).

23

In order to survive dismissal for failure to state a claim, a complaint must contain more than “a

24

formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action;” it must contain factual allegations

25

sufficient “to raise a right to relief above the speculative level.” Bell Atlantic, 550 U.S. at 555.

26

However, “[s]pecific facts are not necessary; the statement [of facts] need only ‘give the

27

defendant fair notice of what the . . . claim is and the grounds upon which it rests.’” Erickson v.

28

Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 93 (2007) (quoting Bell Atlantic, 550 U.S. at 555, citations and internal
2

1

quotations marks omitted). In reviewing a complaint under this standard, the court must accept as

2

true the allegations of the complaint in question, Erickson, 551 U.S. at 93, and construe the

3

pleading in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 236

4

(1974), overruled on other grounds, Davis v. Scherer, 468 U.S. 183 (1984).

5

Named as defendants are Progressive Insurance, National Interstate Insurance, Robert

6

Bagalayos and Lawrence Taylor. Plaintiff was allegedly involved in a vehicle collision involving

7

defendants Bagalayos and Taylor. (ECF No. 1 at 4.) Defendant Progressive Insurance insured

8

defendant Bagalayos, and defendant National Interstate Insurance insured defendant Taylor. (Id.)

9

Plaintiff alleges that defendants Progressive Insurance and National Interstate Insurance refused

10

to settle on behalf of defendants Bagalayos and Taylor, even though defendants Bagalayos and

11

Taylor caused plaintiff’s injuries. (Id. at 3.)

12

In order to state a claim under § 1983, a plaintiff must allege that: (1) defendant was

13

acting under color of state law at the time the complained of act was committed; and (2)

14

defendant’s conduct deprived plaintiff of rights, privileges or immunities secured by the

15

Constitution or laws of the United States. 42 U.S.C. § 1983; see West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48

16

(1988). Private parties are generally not acting under color of state law. Price v. Hawaii, 939

17

F.2d 702, 707-08 (9th Cir. 1991).

18

All of the named defendants are private parties. Because no state actor is named as a

19

defendant, plaintiff’s complaint is dismissed. Although it is unlikely that plaintiff can cure this

20

pleading defect, plaintiff is granted leave to file an amended complaint.

21

The undersigned further observes that plaintiff does not allege how the failure of

22

defendants National Interstate Insurance and Progressive Insurance to settle his claim violated

23

plaintiff’s constitutional rights. If plaintiff files an amended complaint, he must allege how each

24

named defendant violated his constitutional rights.

25

In addition, plaintiff is informed that the court cannot refer to a prior pleading in order to

26

make plaintiff’s amended complaint complete. Local Rule 220 requires that an amended

27

complaint be complete in itself without reference to any prior pleading. This requirement exists

28

because, as a general rule, an amended complaint supersedes the original complaint. See Loux v.
3

1

Rhay, 375 F.2d 55, 57 (9th Cir. 1967). Once plaintiff files an amended complaint, the original

2

pleading no longer serves any function in the case. Therefore, in an amended complaint, as in an

3

original complaint, each claim and the involvement of each defendant must be sufficiently

4

alleged.

5

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

6

1. Plaintiff’s request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted.

7

2. Plaintiff is obligated to pay the statutory filing fee of $350.00 for this action. Plaintiff

8

is assessed an initial partial filing fee in accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C.

9

§ 1915(b)(1). All fees shall be collected and paid in accordance with this court’s order to the

10

Director of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation filed concurrently

11

herewith.

12

3. Plaintiff’s complaint is dismissed.

13

4. Within thirty days from the date of this order, plaintiff shall complete the attached

14

Notice of Amendment and submit the following documents to the court:

15

a. The completed Notice of Amendment; and

16

b. An original and one copy of the Amended Complaint.

17

Plaintiff’s amended complaint shall comply with the requirements of the Civil Rights Act, the

18

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and the Local Rules of Practice. The amended complaint must

19

also bear the docket number assigned to this case and must be labeled “Amended Complaint.”

20

Failure to file an amended complaint in accordance with this order may result in the dismissal of

21

this action.

22

Dated: April 30, 2015

23
24
25
Jam848.dis

26
27
28
4

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

JEREMY JAMISON,

12
13
14

No. 2:15-cv-0848 KJN P

Plaintiff,
v.

NOTICE OF AMENDMENT

PROGRESSIVE INSURANCE, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
17
18

Plaintiff hereby submits the following document in compliance with the court's order
filed______________.
_____________

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Amended Complaint

DATED:
________________________________
Plaintiff