Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Robert C. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Ndubuisi OBIOHA, Psychiatric Technician; Ruben Casanova, Psychiatric Technician; Robert Chase, Psychiatric Technician, Defendants-Appellees, Jason Montijo, Psychiatric Technician, Defendant-Appellee, Coalinga State Hospital; Gerardo Alcala, Defendants, Stephen Garza; William McGhee, Defendants.
MEMORANDUM *
Robert Williams appeals the district court's grant of summary judgment for defendants. Reviewing de novo, we affirm. Wilk v. Neven, 956 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2020).
Williams alleged that defendants—psychiatric technicians at Coalinga State Hospital—violated the due process clause by failing to protect him from another civil detainee, Corey Bell. Summary judgment was properly granted because the undisputed evidence shows that the defendants neither assigned Williams to the unit where the incident occurred nor had reason to perceive an unreasonable risk from Bell. See Castro v. Cty. of L.A., 833 F.3d 1060, 1071 (9th Cir. 2016) (holding that a failure to protect claim requires, among other things, an intentional decision by a defendant to put a plaintiff in conditions that pose a substantial risk of serious harm.).
Williams also alleged equal protection and conditions of confinement claims and appeals the district court's dismissal of these claims for failure to state a claim. They were properly dismissed, however, because Williams pleaded no facts that he was either intentionally discriminated against or subject to punitive detention conditions. See Hartmann v. Cal. Dep't of Corr. & Rehab., 707 F.3d 1114, 1123 (9th Cir. 2013) (equal protection claim requires intentional discrimination); King v. Cty. of L.A., 885 F.3d 548, 556–57 (9th Cir. 2018) (civilly detained individuals may not be subjected to conditions that constitute punishment).
AFFIRMED.
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 20-16309
Decided: August 06, 2021
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)