From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Harris v. Hasky

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Apr 29, 2013
CASE NO. 1:12-cv-01426-SKO PC (E.D. Cal. Apr. 29, 2013)

Opinion

CASE NO. 1:12-cv-01426-SKO PC

04-29-2013

EDDIE HARRIS, Plaintiff, v. HASKY, et al., Defendants.


ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO EITHER

WITHDRAW AMENDED COMPLAINT AND

NOTIFY COURT OF WILLINGNESS TO

PROCEED ONLY AGAINST DEFENDANTS

HASKY AND BELTRAN OR FILE SECOND

AMENDED COMPLAINT


(Doc. 9)


THIRTY-DAY DEADLINE

Plaintiff Eddie Harris, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on August 30, 2012. On March 28, 2013, the Court screened Plaintiff's complaint and ordered Plaintiff to either (1) file an amended complaint curing the deficiencies identified or (2) notify the Court of his willingness to proceed only against Defendants Hasky and Beltran, which would result in the dismissal of Defendant Turner.

Plaintiff filed an amended complaint on April 15, 2013. Given that the amended complaint names only Defendants Hasky and Beltran and omits Defendant Turner, it appears that Plaintiff agrees with proceeding only against Hasky and Beltran. However, instead of notifying the Court of this election as directed, Plaintiff instead filed an amended complaint which is so brief that it no longer states a claim against anyone. By omitting all of the facts set forth in the original complaint, Plaintiff's amended complaint no longer includes detail to support his claim that Defendants Hasky and Beltran acted with deliberate indifference to a substantial risk of harm to his safety, in violation of the Eighth Amendment. Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 847, 114 S.Ct. 1970 (1994); Hearns v. Terhune, 413 F.3d 1036, 1040 (9th Cir. 2005).

The statement of claim in Plaintiff's original complaint was more than twenty pages long. His current statement of claim is only one paragraph.

Accordingly, within thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order, Plaintiff is ORDERED to either (1) withdraw his amended complaint and notify the Court of his willingness to proceed on his original complaint against Defendants Hasky and Beltran only, or (2) file a second amended complaint setting forth sufficient facts to state a claim for relief. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Sheila K. Oberto

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Harris v. Hasky

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Apr 29, 2013
CASE NO. 1:12-cv-01426-SKO PC (E.D. Cal. Apr. 29, 2013)
Case details for

Harris v. Hasky

Case Details

Full title:EDDIE HARRIS, Plaintiff, v. HASKY, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Apr 29, 2013

Citations

CASE NO. 1:12-cv-01426-SKO PC (E.D. Cal. Apr. 29, 2013)