(PC) Hunter v. Brenneman

9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA BRANDON EUGENE HUNTER, No. 2:22-cv-1141 KJM CKD P 13 Plaintiff, 14 v. ORDER BRENNEMAN, et al., 16 Defendants.

18 Plaintiff, a California pretrial detainee proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

21 On October 12, 2022, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were served on plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. No objections to the findings and recommendations have been filed.

25 The court presumes any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 F.2d 26 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. See Robbins v. Carey, 481 F.3d 1143, 1147 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[D]eterminations of law by the magistrate judge are reviewed de novo by both the district court and [the appellate] court . . . .”). Having reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the proper analysis.

3 However, the findings and recommendations do not fully address plaintiff’s Monell claims. In the operative complaint, plaintiff names Sacramento County, the Sacramento County Sheriff’s Office, and the City of Sacramento as defendants, in addition to the individual officers.

6 See Am. Compl. at 4, ECF No. 11.1 Plaintiff alleges Sacramento County and the City are liable because of a history of similar misconduct of pretrial detainees, and the Sheriff’s Office is liable for not properly training the officers. Id. at 8. To establish a municipality’s liability under § 1983 and Monell v. Department of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658 (1978), the plaintiff must show a “policy or custom” caused a constitutional deprivation. Castro v. County of Los Angeles, 833 F.3d 1060, 1073 (9th Cir.) (en banc). Several theories for a policy or custom can support a Monell claim, including showing a history of similar misconduct and a failure to train. In most cases, a “pattern of similar constitutional violations” is necessary for a failure-to-train claim.

14 Connick v. Thompson, 563 U.S. 51, 61 (2011).

15 As the findings and recommendations explain, plaintiff must allege facts regarding, for example, the County and City’s history of similar misconduct or the Sheriff’s Office’s failure to train its officers. Without more than a conclusory statement of prior misconduct or a failure to train, plaintiff’s claims cannot proceed. On these three claims, plaintiff is granted leave to amend.

20 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 21 1. The findings and recommendations filed October 12, 2022 are adopted in full, except with regard to Monell claims against the County or City, which are dismissed with leave to amend; 24 2. All claims other than a claim arising under the Fourteenth Amendment against defendants Long, Moore, Gonsalvo, Pashetov and Brenneman for excessive use of force are dismissed; and 1 The pages cited in ECF No. 11 are those applied by the CM/ECF system.

1 3. This matter is referred back to the assigned magistrate judge for all further pretrial || proceedings.

3 | DATED: December 14, 2022.

5 ( ti / ¢ q_/ ‘ CHIEF NT] ED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE