Beede 351589 v. Pinal County Sheriff Facility

CourtDistrict Court, D. Arizona
DecidedJanuary 4, 2022
Docket2:21-cv-02087
StatusUnknown

This text of Beede 351589 v. Pinal County Sheriff Facility (Beede 351589 v. Pinal County Sheriff Facility) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Arizona primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Beede 351589 v. Pinal County Sheriff Facility, (D. Ariz. 2022).

Opinion

1 WO KM 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Jonathan Beede, No. CV 21-02087-PHX-JAT (JZB) 10 Plaintiff, 11 v. ORDER 12 Pinal County Sheriff Facility, et al., 13 Defendants.

14 15 Plaintiff Jonathan Beede, who is confined in the Pinal County Jail, has filed an 16 incomplete pro se civil rights Complaint (Doc. 1) and an incomplete Application to Proceed 17 In Forma Pauperis (Doc. 2). The Court will deny the deficient Application to Proceed, 18 dismiss the Complaint with leave to amend, and give Plaintiff thirty days to (1) file an 19 amended complaint on a court-approved form and (2) either pay the filing and 20 administrative fees or file a complete Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. 21 I. Payment of Filing Fee 22 When bringing an action, a prisoner must either pay the $350.00 filing fee and a 23 $52.00 administrative fee in a lump sum or, if granted the privilege of proceeding in forma 24 pauperis, pay the $350.00 filing fee incrementally as set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). 25 An application to proceed in forma pauperis requires an affidavit of indigence and a 26 certified copy of the inmate’s trust account statement for the six months preceding the filing 27 of the Complaint. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2). An inmate must submit statements from each 28 institution where the inmate was confined during the six-month period. Id. To assist 1 prisoners in meeting these requirements, the Court requires use of a form application. 2 LRCiv 3.4. 3 If a prisoner is granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis, the Court will assess an 4 initial partial filing fee of 20% of either the average monthly deposits or the average 5 monthly balance in Plaintiff’s account, whichever is greater. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). An 6 initial partial filing fee will only be collected when funds exist. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(4). 7 The balance of the $350.00 filing fee will be collected in monthly payments of 20% of the 8 preceding month’s income credited to an inmate’s account, each time the amount in the 9 account exceeds $10.00. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2). 10 II. Application Fails to Comply With Statute 11 Plaintiff has used the court-approved form, but Plaintiff has not submitted a certified 12 six-month trust account statement. In light of this deficiency, the Court will deny the 13 Application to Proceed and will give Plaintiff 30 days to either pay the $402.00 filing and 14 administrative fees or file a complete Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis and 15 certified six-month trust account statement. 16 III. Statutory Screening of Prisoner Complaints 17 The Court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief 18 against a governmental entity or an officer or an employee of a governmental entity. 28 19 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The Court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if a plaintiff 20 has raised claims that are legally frivolous or malicious, that fail to state a claim upon which 21 relief may be granted, or that seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from 22 such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1)–(2). 23 Local Rule of Civil Procedure 3.4 requires in part that “[a]ll complaints and 24 applications to proceed in forma pauperis by incarcerated persons shall be signed and 25 legibly written or typewritten on forms approved by the Court and in accordance with the 26 instructions provided with the forms.” Plaintiff’s Complaint is missing the first two pages 27 of the court-approved form and therefore does not comply with Local Rule of Civil 28 Procedure 3.4. The Court will dismiss the Complaint without prejudice, with leave to 1 amend, in order for Plaintiff to file an amended complaint on a complete, court-approved 2 form. 3 IV. Leave to Amend 4 Within 30 days, Plaintiff may submit a first amended complaint on a court-approved 5 form. The Clerk of Court will mail Plaintiff a court-approved form to use for filing a first 6 amended complaint. If Plaintiff fails to use the court-approved form, the Court may strike 7 the amended complaint and dismiss this action without further notice to Plaintiff. 8 Plaintiff must clearly designate on the face of the document that it is the “First 9 Amended Complaint.” The first amended complaint must be retyped or rewritten in its 10 entirety on the court-approved form and may not incorporate any part of the original 11 Complaint by reference. Plaintiff must complete the entire court-approved form and may 12 include only one claim per count. 13 A first amended complaint supersedes the original Complaint. Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 14 963 F.2d 1258, 1262 (9th Cir. 1992); Hal Roach Studios v. Richard Feiner & Co., 896 F.2d 15 1542, 1546 (9th Cir. 1990). After amendment, the Court will treat the original Complaint 16 as nonexistent. Ferdik, 963 F.2d at 1262. Any cause of action that was raised in the 17 original Complaint and that was voluntarily dismissed or was dismissed without prejudice 18 is waived if it is not alleged in a first amended complaint. Lacey v. Maricopa County, 693 19 F.3d 896, 928 (9th Cir. 2012) (en banc). 20 If Plaintiff files an amended complaint, Plaintiff must write short, plain statements 21 telling the Court: (1) the constitutional right Plaintiff believes was violated; (2) the name 22 of the Defendant who violated the right; (3) exactly what that Defendant did or failed to 23 do; (4) how the action or inaction of that Defendant is connected to the violation of 24 Plaintiff’s constitutional right; and (5) what specific injury Plaintiff suffered because of 25 that Defendant’s conduct. See Rizzo v. Goode, 423 U.S. 362, 371-72, 377 (1976). 26 Plaintiff must repeat this process for each person he names as a Defendant. If 27 Plaintiff fails to affirmatively link the conduct of each named Defendant with the specific 28 injury suffered by Plaintiff, the allegations against that Defendant will be dismissed for 1 failure to state a claim. Conclusory allegations that a Defendant or group of 2 Defendants has violated a constitutional right are not acceptable and will be 3 dismissed. 4 Plaintiff should note that the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has held that “claims 5 for violations of the right to adequate medical care ‘brought by pretrial detainees against 6 individual defendants under the Fourteenth Amendment’ must be evaluated under an 7 objective deliberate indifference standard.” Gordon v. County of Orange, 888 F.3d 1118, 8 1124-25 (9th Cir. 2018) (quoting Castro v. County of Los Angeles, 833 F.3d 1060, 1070 9 (9th Cir. 2016)).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Rizzo v. Goode
423 U.S. 362 (Supreme Court, 1976)
Daniels v. Williams
474 U.S. 327 (Supreme Court, 1986)
Graham v. Connor
490 U.S. 386 (Supreme Court, 1989)
Michael Henry Ferdik v. Joe Bonzelet, Sheriff
963 F.2d 1258 (Ninth Circuit, 1992)
United States v. Michael Andrew Hunter
19 F.3d 895 (Fourth Circuit, 1994)
Jonathon Castro v. County of Los Angeles
833 F.3d 1060 (Ninth Circuit, 2016)
Mary Gordon v. County of Orange
888 F.3d 1118 (Ninth Circuit, 2018)
Moulton v. National Farmers' Bank of Owatonna
27 F.2d 403 (D. Minnesota, 1928)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Beede 351589 v. Pinal County Sheriff Facility, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/beede-351589-v-pinal-county-sheriff-facility-azd-2022.