# (PC) Price v. Stockton Police Dept.

> District Court, E.D. California · February 27, 2025

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10814099

## Case

- **Court:** District Court, E.D. California
- **Decided:** February 27, 2025
- **Opinion:** 100trialcourt
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10814099

## Opinion text

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11 EUGENE PRICE, No. 2:24-cv-3758 CKD P
12 Plaintiff,
13 v. ORDER
14 STOCKTON POLICE DEPARTMENT,
15 Defendant.
16
17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and seeking relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §
18 1983. This proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 302 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
19 636(b)(1).
20 Plaintiff requests leave to proceed in forma pauperis. As plaintiff has submitted a
21 declaration that makes the showing required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), his request will be granted.
22 Plaintiff is required to pay the statutory filing fee of $350.00 for this action. 28 U.S.C. §§
23 1914(a), 1915(b)(1). By separate order, the court will direct the appropriate agency to collect the
24 initial partial filing fee from plaintiff’s trust account and forward it to the Clerk of the Court.
25 Thereafter, plaintiff will be obligated for monthly payments of twenty percent of the preceding
26 month’s income credited to plaintiff’s prison trust account. These payments will be forwarded by
27 the appropriate agency to the Clerk of the Court each time the amount in plaintiff’s account
28 exceeds $10.00, until the filing fee is paid in full. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2).
1 The court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against a
2 governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The
3 court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are legally
4 “frivolous or malicious,” that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek
5 monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1),(2).
6 The court has reviewed plaintiff’s complaint and finds that it fails to state a claim upon
7 which relief can be granted under federal law. Plaintiff’s complaint must be dismissed. The
8 court will, however, grant leave to file an amended complaint. In drafting an amended complaint,
9 plaintiff is informed as follows.
10 The only defendant identified by plaintiff is the Stockton Police Department. Plaintiff is
11 informed that municipalities cannot be held vicariously liable under § 1983 for the actions of their
12 employees. Monell v. Dep’t of Social Services, 436 U.S. 585, 691-94 (1978). “Instead, it is
13 when execution of a government's policy or custom, whether made by its lawmakers or by those
14 whose edicts or acts may fairly be said to represent official policy, inflicts the injury that the
15 government as an entity is responsible under § 1983.” Id. at 694. Plaintiff does not present any
16 valid basis for liability as to the City of Stockton.
17 Also, if plaintiff chooses to amend the complaint, plaintiff must demonstrate how the
18 conditions complained of have resulted in a deprivation of plaintiff’s constitutional rights. See
19 Ellis v. Cassidy, 625 F.2d 227 (9th Cir. 1980). In his amended complaint, plaintiff must allege in
20 specific terms how each named defendant is involved. There can be no liability under 42 U.S.C.
21 § 1983 unless there is some affirmative link or connection between a defendant’s actions and the
22 claimed deprivation. Rizzo v. Goode, 423 U.S. 362 (1976). Furthermore, vague and conclusory
23 allegations of official participation in civil rights violations are not sufficient. Ivey v. Board of
24 Regents, 673 F.2d 266, 268 (9th Cir. 1982).
25 Finally, plaintiff is informed that the court cannot refer to a prior pleading in order to
26 make plaintiff’s amended complaint complete. Local Rule 220 requires that an amended
27 complaint be complete in itself without reference to any prior pleading.
28 /////
1 In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
2 1. Plaintiff's request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 2) is GRANTED.
3 2. Plaintiff is obligated to pay the statutory filing fee of $350.00 for this action. All fees
4 || shall be collected and paid in accordance with this court’s order to the Director of the California
5 || Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation filed concurrently herewith.
6 3. Plaintiff's complaint is dismissed.
7 4. Plaintiff is granted thirty days from the date of service of this order to file an amended
8 | complaint that complies with the requirements of the Civil Rights Act, the Federal Rules of Civil
9 || Procedure, and the Local Rules of Practice. The amended complaint must bear the docket
10 || number assigned this case and must be labeled “Amended Complaint.” Failure to file an
11 || amended complaint in accordance with this order will result in a recommendation that this action
12 || be dismissed.
13 | Dated: February 27, 2025 / ae □□ / a Ly a
4 CAROLYN K DELANEY
15 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
16
17
18 1
19 pric3758.14
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10814099. Public record. Not legal advice.