Porter v. Wegman
| Decision Date | 09 May 2013 |
| Docket Number | Case No. 1:10-cv-01500-LJO-DLB PC |
| Parties | BRIAN ELLIS PORTER, Plaintiff, v. CHERYLEE WEGMAN, et al., Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of California |
OBJECTIONS, IF ANY, DUE WITHIN
Plaintiff Brian Ellis Porter ("Plaintiff") is a prisoner in the custody of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation ("CDCR"). Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On September 25, 2012, this case was consolidated with Porter v. Wegman, et al., Case No. 1:11-cv-02106-MJS (E.D. Cal.). On October 18, 2012, the Court ordered Plaintiff to file a Third Amended Complaint, incorporating all the pleadings in both actions. ECF No. 59. On December 17, 2012, Plaintiff filed his Third Amended Complaint.1 ECF No. 61.
The Court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The Court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are legally"frivolous or malicious," that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. Id. § 1915A(b)(1),(2). "Notwithstanding any filing fee, or any portion thereof, that may have been paid, the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that . . . the action or appeal . . . fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted." Id. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).
A complaint must contain "a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief . . . ." Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). Detailed factual allegations are not required, but "[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements, do not suffice." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (citing Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)). Plaintiff must set forth "sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.'" Id. (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570). While factual allegations are accepted as true, legal conclusions are not. Id.
Plaintiff was incarcerated at Kern Valley State Prison ("KVSP") in Delano, California, where the events giving rise to this action occurred. Plaintiff names as Defendants: community resource/partnership manager Cherylee Wegman; secretary of CDCR Matthew Cate; warden of KVSP M. D. Biter; chief medical officer S. Lopez; associate warden J. Castro; registered nurse E. Lunsford; licensed vocational nurse Grewal; and Does 1 through 100.
Plaintiff alleges the following. Plaintiff is a member of the religion called House of Yahweh ("HOY"). Plaintiff believes that living by the 613 laws of Yahweh, which are derived from the first five books of the Hebrew Bible, is necessary for salvation. In adherence with those laws, Plaintiff is required to keep all Sabbath days, eat only clean/kosher foods, and observe all Holy Feast Days, which includes Yahweh's Passover Feast of Unleavened Bread ("HOY Passover"). Second Am. Compl. ("TAC") ¶ 13. Plaintiff is also mandated to eat only a kosher diet according to the scriptures. TAC ¶ 16.
The HOY Passover lasts eight days, requires HOY practitioners to destroy all leavened foods in their possession, and not to eat foods containing leaven, or come in contact with food that has been contaminated with leaven. TAC ¶ 17. During the HOY Passover, HOY observers must eatsome amount of unleavened bread on each day, and eat some portion of meat from a Passover sacrifice the night beginning this religious event. TAC ¶ 18.
In 2008, Plaintiff applied for and received kosher meals as part of his religious diet. TAC ¶ 19. Plaintiff was granted kosher meal diet because the Jewish Chaplain determined that Plaintiff's doctrines are the same as the Jewish doctrine regarding dietary needs. TAC ¶ 19. On November 21, 2008, Defendant Wegman circulated a memo that referred to the HOY as a religious hate group. Plaintiff subsequently never received kosher meals. TAC ¶ 20.
During Passover, the Jewish Kosher Diet Program provided meals that adhered to all the laws of the HOY governing the HOY Passover. TAC ¶ 21. Plaintiff and other HOY members submitted a religious event package specifically to receive reasonable accommodations for observance of the HOY Passover, taking place from April 10, 2009 to April 17, 2009. TAC ¶ 21. Despite submitting all necessary forms and information, the HOY did not receive any response concerning the religious event. TAC ¶ 23.
On April 7, 2009, Plaintiff received a religious diet card for a vegetarian diet, which was authorized by Defendant Wegman. TAC ¶ 24. The vegetarian diet does not meet Plaintiff's religious dietary needs, namely: that he must eat the meat of the sacrifice on Passover night; eating unleavened bread during the HOY Passover; heated meals on Sabbath; and insured that it was kosher. TAC ¶ 25. When Plaintiff did not receive the expected religious meals for the HOY Passover, Plaintiff believed it to be complications from the previous year, but eventually expected to receive them. TAC ¶ 27. Plaintiff was aware that prison policy dictates that if a regular meal is taken by the inmate, the inmate is removed from the religious event list and subject to possible discipline for manipulation of staff. TAC ¶ 27.
On April 15, 2009, Plaintiff, having starved for five days, was contacted by Defendant Wegman as a result of Plaintiff's family contacting Defendant Wegman's supervisors. TAC ¶ 28. Plaintiff told Defendant Wegman the necessity of the requested religious meals and/or a kosher diet and explained the significance of the HOY Passover. TAC ¶ 28. Defendant Wegman admitted that Plaintiff and the HOY inmates' rights were being violated and she promised to provide Plaintiff with proper food. TAC ¶ 28. On April 15, 2009, in the evening, Plaintiff received a meager kosher meal.TAC ¶ 29. On April 16, 2009, Plaintiff received the same meager kosher meal. TAC ¶ 30.
On April 17, 2009, Plaintiff participated in a special event in the Facility B chapel. TAC ¶ 31. The food provided, however, did not meet the religious specifications as requested by the HOY inmates in the Event Package. TAC ¶ 31. No HOY inmates were willing to eat the food. TAC ¶ 31. The food was brought by prison staff at approximately 6:30 p.m., during the Sabbath services. TAC ¶ 32. The HOY inmates refused to eat the food, and staff then ended the service immediately and ordered all inmates back to their housing units. TAC ¶ 32. Plaintiff and other HOY inmates were able to get the food after sunset, at which time it had no religious significance. TAC ¶ 33.
Plaintiff and HOY inmates filed inmate grievances complaining of the lack of reasonable accommodation. TAC ¶ 34. Defendant Wegman responded by stating that the Passover celebration described in the California Code of Regulations, Title 15, and Jewish Kosher Diet Program are exclusively for Jews. TAC ¶ 34.
Around the middle of January 2010, HOY inmates submitted another Religious Event Package and again requested reasonable accommodations for the observance of Passover. TAC ¶ 35. Plaintiff later received a vegetarian diet chrono, approved by Defendant Wegman and the Native American chaplain, via institutional mail, despite being initially approved by the Jewish chaplain for the Jewish Kosher Diet Program. TAC ¶ 37.
On March 30, 2010, at 9:00 a.m., Plaintiff was called to the special religious event, despite it not being properly scheduled for sunset. TAC ¶ 39. At approximately, 11:00 a.m., a meal was served that had no religious significance. TAC ¶ 40. Plaintiff alerted both custody and medical staff that he was refusing to eat because he was not receiving his necessary religious meals. TAC ¶ 41. As a result of not eating, Plaintiff passed out in his cell on the morning of April 6, 2010. TAC ¶ 43. Plaintiff's cellmate alerted both custody and medical staff, but no action was taken. TAC ¶ 43.
Plaintiff later passed out at approximately 3:00 p.m. in the shower, hitting his head. TAC ¶ 44. Plaintiff was taken by medical staff to the clinic by wheelchair. TAC ¶ 44. Defendant Grewal, the nurse, did not check Plaintiff's head or neck for possible injuries, or record Plaintiff's status. TAC ¶ 45. Defendant Grewal only asked how Plaintiff felt at the moment so she could transcribe a medical request slip for Plaintiff to come at a later date. TAC ¶ 46. Defendant Grewal stated thatthere was nothing she could do because there was no RN or doctor available. TAC ¶ 46. Defendant Grewal told Plaintiff that once he was able to regain his strength and balance, he was to return to his housing unit. TAC ¶ 46. Plaintiff had to leave before the institutional count, which was within the hour, so he gingerly walked back. TAC ¶ 46. Plaintiff suffered multiple days of nausea, dizziness, memory loss, and headaches following his head injury. TAC ¶ 47. In April 2011, Plaintiff was in the same situation, wherein KVSP failed to provide religious meals for Plaintiff's observance of Passover. TAC ¶ 51.
Plaintiff contends a violation of the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment for denial of reasonable accommodations regarding the observance of HOY Passover and denial of the Jewish Kosher Diet Program, violation of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000, violation of the Eighth Amendment, discrimination against his religion in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and the Federal Grant Statutes (42 U.S.C. § 2000d and § 3789d(c)(1)).
Plaintiff request as relief: declaratory judgment, preliminary and permanent injunction, compensatory and punitive damages, and costs of suit.
To continue reading
Request your trial