Opinion
Case No. 1:19-cv-00825-AWI-EPG (PC)
03-27-2020
DANIEL LEE THORNBERRY, Plaintiff, v. HAROLD TATE, Defendant.
SCREENING ORDER ORDER ALLOWING PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT TO PROCEED AGAINST DEFENDANT HAROLD TATE ON PLAINTIFF'S CLAIMS FOR DELIBERATE INDIFFERENCE TO SERIOUS MEDICAL NEEDS IN VIOLATION OF THE EIGHTH AMENDMENT AND MEDICAL MALPRACTICE (ECF NO. 13)
Daniel Lee Thornberry ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed the complaint commencing this action on June 13, 2019. (ECF No. 1). The Court screened the complaint and found that Plaintiff stated a cognizable claim against Defendant Harold Tate for deliberate indifference to serious medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment. (ECF No. 10). The Court declined to allow any state law claims because Plaintiff had not alleged that he complied with California's Government Claims Act. (Id.).
Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint on October 31, 2019. (ECF No. 13). Plaintiff asserts the same underlying facts, and also adds information showing his compliance with California's Government Claims Act.
Thus, for the reasons explained in the Court's initial screening order, and in light of Plaintiff's allegations (and evidence) that he complied with California's Government Claims Act, the Court will allow Plaintiff's claims against Defendant Harold Tate for deliberate indifference to serious medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment and for medical malpractice under state law to proceed past the screening stage.
CONCLUSION AND ORDER
The Court has screened Plaintiff's complaint and finds that it states cognizable claims against Defendant Harold Tate for deliberate indifference to serious medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment and for medical malpractice under state law.
As the Court has found all of Plaintiff's claims cognizable, the Court will, in due course, issue an order authorizing service of process on Defendant Harold Tate. IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: March 27 , 2020
/s/_________
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE