Paddyaker v. Doe
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re: 1 application to proceed in forma pauperis with attached proposed civil-rights complaint, filed by Plaintiff Harold Paddyaker. Objections to R&R due by 2/21/2006. Noting Date set for 2/24/2006. Signed by Magistrate Judge P. Donohue. (Attachments: # 1 R&R Cover Letter; # 2 R&R Proposed Order; and # 3 R&R Proposed Judgment.) (BHF)
Paddyaker v. Doe
Page 1 of 3
01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) DIANE DOE, Kitchen Supervisor, Monroe ) Correctional Complex, ) ) Defendant. ) ____________________________________ )
09 HAROLD PADDYAKER, 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Case No. C06-0103-JCC-JPD
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
I. BACKGROUND Plaintiff is an inmate at the Stafford Creek Corrections Center in Aberdeen,
17 Washington, who is proceeding pro se in his attempt to bring a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil-rights 18 claim against an employee of the Monroe Correctional Complex (the "Prison"). While 19 working in the Prison's kitchen in 2003, plaintiff alleges that he requested work boots, but was 20 informed that the kitchen supervisor, Diane "Doe," would not provide them. Dkt. No. 1, 21 Complaint at 3. According to the complaint, plaintiff subsequently slipped in the kitchen and 22 injured his back. Id. Plaintiff appears to allege Ms. Doe is liable for his injuries. For the 23 reasons discussed below, the Court recommends that the complaint be dismissed. 24 25 II. ANALYSIS In order to state a claim for relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must assert that
26 he suffered a violation of rights protected by the Constitution or created by federal statute, and
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION PAGE -1
Page 2 of 3
01 that the violation was proximately caused by a person acting under color of state or federal 02 law. See Crumpton v. Gates, 947 F.2d 1418, 1420 (9th Cir. 1991); see also WMX 03 Technologies, Inc. v. Miller, 197 F.3d 367, 372 (9th Cir. 1999) (en banc). Respondeat 04 superior liability will not support § 1983 liability unless plaintiff demonstrates that a supervisor 05 participated in the violations, directed the violations, or knew about the violations and did 06 nothing to prevent them. Taylor v. List, 880 F.2d 1040, 1045 (9th Cir. 1989) (internal citation 07 omitted); see also Mabe v. San Bernardino County Dep't of Pub. Soc. Serv., 237 F.3d 1101, 08 1109 (9th Cir. 2001). 09 Although the Court is sympathetic to the injuries plaintiff may have sustained, this
10 complaint fails to allege that Ms. Doe personally participated in violating any of plaintiff's 11 constitutional rights. Rather, it appears to suggest that she is responsible for plaintiff's injuries 12 by virtue of the fact that she was the kitchen supervisor at the time of the alleged injury. Even 13 if the complaint were construed to allege adequately respondeat superior liability, it has 14 articulated no constitutional violation. Allegations of mere negligence do not state a violation 15 of 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See Stevens v. Koskey, 877 F.2d 1435, 1440-41 (9th Cir. 1989) 16 ("[a]llowing mere negligence to sustain a due process claim under section 1983 would 17 trivialize the fourteenth amendment"); see also Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1334 18 (9th Cir. 1990) (noting that in the context of medical care, allegations of "mere malpractice, or 19 even gross negligence, do[ ] not suffice"). Because the above-described deficiency cannot be 20 corrected by amendment, the Court recommends that the complaint be dismissed. See Cato v. 21 United States, 70 F.3d 1103, 1106 (9th Cir. 1995). 22 23 III. CONCLUSION The Court recommends that plaintiff's complaint be dismissed for failure to allege
24 adequately a violation of a constitutional right. The Court further recommends that plaintiff's 25 application to proceed in forma pauperis be denied as moot. A proposed order accompanies 26 this Report and Recommendation.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION PAGE -2
Page 3 of 3
01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
DATED this 30th day of January, 2006.
JAMES P. DONOHUE United States Magistrate Judge
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION PAGE -3
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?