Denetchee v. Maricopa County Estrella Jail

CourtDistrict Court, D. Arizona
DecidedDecember 11, 2023
Docket2:23-cv-01930
StatusUnknown

This text of Denetchee v. Maricopa County Estrella Jail (Denetchee v. Maricopa County Estrella Jail) 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
Denetchee v. Maricopa County Estrella Jail, (D. Ariz. 2023).

Opinion

1 MH 2 WO 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Ashley Ada Denetchee, No. CV-23-01930-PHX-JAT (JZB) 10 Plaintiff, 11 v. ORDER 12 Maricopa County Estrella Jail, 13 Defendant.

14 15 On September 14, 2023, Plaintiff Ashley Ada Denetchee, who is confined in 16 Maricopa County’s Estrella Jail, filed a pro se civil rights Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 17 § 1983 (Doc. 1) and an Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. 2). The Court will 18 grant the Application and dismiss the Complaint with leave to amend. 19 I. Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis and Filing Fee 20 The Court will grant Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. 28 21 U.S.C. § 1915(a). Plaintiff must pay the statutory filing fee of $350.00. 28 U.S.C. 22 § 1915(b)(1). The Court will assess an initial partial filing fee of $12.58. The remainder 23 of the fee will be collected monthly in payments of 20% of the previous month’s income 24 credited to Plaintiff’s trust account each time the amount in the account exceeds $10.00. 25 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2). The Court will enter a separate Order requiring the appropriate 26 government agency to collect and forward the fees according to the statutory formula. 27 . . . . 28 . . . . 1 II. Statutory Screening of Prisoner Complaints 2 The Court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief 3 against a governmental entity or an officer or an employee of a governmental entity. 28 4 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The Court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if a plaintiff 5 has raised claims that are legally frivolous or malicious, that fail to state a claim upon which 6 relief may be granted, or that seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from 7 such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1)–(2). 8 A pleading must contain a “short and plain statement of the claim showing that the 9 pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2) (emphasis added). While Rule 8 does 10 not demand detailed factual allegations, “it demands more than an unadorned, the- 11 defendant-unlawfully-harmed-me accusation.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 12 (2009). “Threadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere 13 conclusory statements, do not suffice.” Id. 14 “[A] complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a 15 claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’” Id. (quoting Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 16 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). A claim is plausible “when the plaintiff pleads factual content 17 that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the 18 misconduct alleged.” Id. “Determining whether a complaint states a plausible claim for 19 relief [is] . . . a context-specific task that requires the reviewing court to draw on its judicial 20 experience and common sense.” Id. at 679. Thus, although a plaintiff’s specific factual 21 allegations may be consistent with a constitutional claim, a court must assess whether there 22 are other “more likely explanations” for a defendant’s conduct. Id. at 681. 23 But as the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has instructed, courts 24 must “continue to construe pro se filings liberally.” Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 342 25 (9th Cir. 2010). A “complaint [filed by a pro se prisoner] ‘must be held to less stringent 26 standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers.’” Id. (quoting Erickson v. Pardus, 551 27 U.S. 89, 94 (2007) (per curiam)). 28 . . . . 1 If the Court determines that a pleading could be cured by the allegation of other 2 facts, a pro se litigant is entitled to an opportunity to amend a complaint before dismissal 3 of the action. See Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1127-29 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc). 4 Plaintiff’s Complaint will be dismissed for failure to state a claim, but because it may 5 possibly be amended to state a claim, the Court will dismiss it with leave to amend. 6 III. Complaint 7 In her one-count Complaint, Plaintiff asserts that her health has been threatened by 8 the conditions at the Estrella Jail. She claims there is black mold “throughout the entire 9 jail,” including in the air vents and water. According to Plaintiff, the consistent inhalation 10 of black mold “causes a major threat to [detainees’] respi[ra]tory system[s].” Plaintiff is 11 seeking damages from the Estrella Jail, which she has named as the sole defendant. 12 IV. Failure to State a Claim 13 Section 1983 imposes liability on any “person” who violates an individual’s federal 14 rights while acting under color of state law. Congress intended municipalities and other 15 local government units to be included among those persons to whom § 1983 applies. 16 Monell v. Dept. of Soc. Servs. of New York, 436 U.S. 658, 689-90 (1978). However, the 17 Estrella Jail is a building or collection of buildings, not a person or legally created entity 18 capable of being sued. Thus, the Court will dismiss Defendant Maricopa County Estrella 19 Jail. The Court will also dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint without prejudice based on her 20 failure to state a claim against the sole Defendant named therein. 21 V. Leave to Amend 22 Within 30 days, Plaintiff may submit a first amended complaint to cure the 23 deficiencies outlined above. The Clerk of Court will mail Plaintiff a court-approved form 24 to use for filing a first amended complaint. If Plaintiff fails to use the court-approved form, 25 the Court may strike the amended complaint and dismiss this action without further notice 26 to Plaintiff. 27 Plaintiff must clearly designate on the face of the document that it is the “First 28 Amended Complaint.” The first amended complaint must be retyped or rewritten in its 1 entirety on the court-approved form and may not incorporate any part of the original 2 Complaint by reference. Plaintiff may include only one claim per count. 3 A first amended complaint supersedes the original Complaint. Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 4 963 F.2d 1258, 1262 (9th Cir. 1992); Hal Roach Studios v. Richard Feiner & Co., 896 F.2d 5 1542, 1546 (9th Cir. 1990). After amendment, the Court will treat the original Complaint 6 as nonexistent. Ferdik, 963 F.2d at 1262. Any cause of action that was raised in the 7 original Complaint and that was voluntarily dismissed or was dismissed without prejudice 8 is waived if it is not alleged in a first amended complaint. Lacey v. Maricopa County, 693 9 F.3d 896, 928 (9th Cir. 2012) (en banc).

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

Related

Gardner v. Collins
27 U.S. 58 (Supreme Court, 1829)
Rizzo v. Goode
423 U.S. 362 (Supreme Court, 1976)
Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Servs.
436 U.S. 658 (Supreme Court, 1978)
Bell v. Wolfish
441 U.S. 520 (Supreme Court, 1979)
Daniels v. Williams
474 U.S. 327 (Supreme Court, 1986)
Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly
550 U.S. 544 (Supreme Court, 2007)
Ashcroft v. Iqbal
556 U.S. 662 (Supreme Court, 2009)
Hebbe v. Pliler
627 F.3d 338 (Ninth Circuit, 2010)
Michael Henry Ferdik v. Joe Bonzelet, Sheriff
963 F.2d 1258 (Ninth Circuit, 1992)
Hearns v. Terhune
413 F.3d 1036 (Ninth Circuit, 2005)
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)
Alvarez-Machain v. United States
107 F.3d 696 (Ninth Circuit, 1996)
Lopez v. Smith
203 F.3d 1122 (Ninth Circuit, 2000)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Denetchee v. Maricopa County Estrella Jail, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/denetchee-v-maricopa-county-estrella-jail-azd-2023.