Case 5:16-cv-01617-ODW-JEM Document 1 Filed 07/25/16 Page 1 of 16 Page ID #:1 RELATED DDJ FILED CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUL 25 2016 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA RS BY: ___________________ DEPUTY 5:16-CV-01617-ODW-JEM RECEIVED CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUL 22 2016 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA BY: ___________________ DEPUTY Case Document 1 Filed 07/25/16 Page 2 of 16 Page ID a. Parties to this previous lawsuit: Plaintiff Defendants b. Court c. Docket or case number d. Name ofjudge to whom case was assigned e. Disposition (For example: Was the case dismissed?? lt?so. what was the basis for dismissal? Was it appealed? [s it still pending?) Issues raised: g. Approximate date of ?ling lawsuit: h. Appro?mate date of disposition B. EXHAUSTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES I. Is there a grievance procedure available at the institution where the events relating to your current complaint occun'ed'? El No 7 Have you ?led a grievance concernng the facts relating to your current complaint? El Yes lt?your answer is no. explain why not Deputies have develomd customs: px?tiges Lg pass- out or issue grievances for these issuest stating not grievable. Therefore, Plaintiff is blocked from filing grievances. 3. Is the grievance procedure completed? f?El Yes El No lf'your answer is no, explain why not 4. Please attach copies of papers related to the grievance procedure. c. JURISDICTION This complaint alleges that the civil rights ot'plaintil'l' RONY KHNEISHER {print planttit'l?s namcl who presently resides at VAILEY PRISON. P.O.BOX 92. 93610 {Ii?tailing address or plaice o] conlutement} were violated by the actions ofthe dei?endantts) named below which actions were directed against plaintiff at RIVERSIDE COUNIY DETENTION CENTERS. RIVERSIDE. CALIFORNIA. is here rotation occurred?i RIGHTS (TOM PI Page 2 olin Case Document 1 Filed 07/25/16 Page 3 of 16 Page ID JUNE 2013 to NOVEMBER 2013 2014 to NOVEMBER 2014. on (date or dates) (Claim iTiann?Iii ill} NOTE: You need not name more than one defendant or allege more than one claim. Ifyou are naming more than ?ve defendants. make a copy ofthis page to provide the information for additional defendants. Defendant COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE DEPT.) resides or works at lfuil name of first delendanl} 4080 LEMON STREET. . RIVERSIDE, CA. 92408 i full address of Iirsl defend-anti PUBLIC ENTITY position and title. ii any The defendant is sued in hisfher (Check one or both}: individual a official capacity. Explain how this defendant was acting under color of law: ALLOWED EMPIOYEES TO DEVELOP A WIDESPREAD CUSTOM dc PRATICE AND MAINTAIN VERY UNSANITARY CELL LIVING CONDITIONS FOR INMATES . 2. Defendant STAN SNIFF resides or works at [Full name of first defendant) 4095 Lana STREET, RIVERSIDE, CA. 92501 lfull address of first defendant} SHERIFF tdelendant's position and title. It an}! The derisndant is sued in hisr'her {Check one or both): ?individual of?cial capacity. Explain how this defendant was acting under color of law: FAEURE TO CURE CONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATIONS OR ABATE IT. POLICY MAKER OF A SYSTEMATICAILY DETECTIVE POLICY THAT IS THE MOVING FORCE OF DEPRIVATION. 3. Defendant resides or works a; trail name of ?rst del?endanti #095 IJEMON STREET. RIVERSIDELA. 92501 ifull address of first defendant! UNDER SHERIFF (defendant?s position and lflie. if any] The defendant is sued in hisi?her {Check one or both): EIindividual Cl of?cial capacity. Explain how this defendant was acting under color of law: FAILURE TO CURE CONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATIONS 0R ABATE IT. POLICY MAKER OF A SYSTEMATICAILY DEFECTIVE POLICY THAT IS THE WING FORCE OF DEPRIVATION II. RIG-H15 CV-f?if?i LT '97} Page 3 11ft) Case Document 1 Filed 07/25/16 Page 4 of 16 Page ID 4. Defendant resides or works at [full name of ?rst defendant} (qu address of ?rst defendant} [defendant?s poslnon and title, if any) The defendant is sued in hisfher (Check one or both): El individual I El of?cial capacity. Explain how this defendant was acting under color of law: 5. Defendant resides or works at [full name of ?rst defendant) address of ?rst defendant} {defendant's position and title; 1fany) The defendant is sued in hisfher (Check one or both): El individual El of?cial capacity. Explain how this defendant was acting under color of law: CIVIL RIGHTS Page 4 off: Case Document 1 Filed 07/25/16 Page 5 of 16 Page ID D. CLAIM The following civil right has been violated: SEE PAGES 12-13 Supporting Facts: Include all facts you consider important. State the Facts clearly. in your own words. and without citing legal authority or argument. Be certain you describe. in separater numbered paragraphs, exactly what each {by name) did to violate your right. SEE PAGES 7-13 *t?f'there it.- amt-e than one et'ot?nt, describe the additional on another attached piece ofpapet? using the some outline. CIVIL RIGHTS (?t?Go Page 5 ol't-r Case Document 1 Filed 07/25/16 Page 6 of 16 Page ID E. REQUEST FOR RELIEF I believe that I am entitled to [he following speci?c relief: (A) Award damages in the amount of (Pursuant to the settlement of Bodnar vs. Riverside County EDCV-11-0291. Which amounted to $2,500. a month) . I (B) Award any other damages the court deems fit. (C) Allow leave l'n amend when Allow apml'anenL QE when nereqqary. JULY 12 2016 R0 WEBER (Dare; (Sigmimre {J'Pl?ninrg??} CIVIL RIGHTS L?k'ea 17.97} Page ool'e Case Document 1 Filed 07/25/16 Page 7 of 16 Page (1). (2). (3). (4). (5). Plaintiff, Rony Khneiser, (hereafter Plaintiff") was a predetainee in Riverside County Detention Centers from June 2013 to November 2013 at Robert Presley Detention Center (R.P.D.C.) and from Feburary 2014 to November 2014 at Larry D. Smith Center in Banning,Ca. Plaintiff endured each time the adjoining cell flushes their toilet, raw sewage and foul water would end up in his cell, splaShing on the toilet seat, floor and/or wall around the toilet area. forcing the plaintiff to live in unsanitary living conditions. Plaintiff as well as other inmates would or did request the deputies numerous times to have maintenance fix the back-flushing problem. ReSponses such as, "its just the way the facility was built", the County does not have the money to fix it" or if you don't like it, don't come to jail." Plaintiff as well as other inmates would or did request from deputies numerous times to get cleaning supplies to clean the unsanitary condition caused by each backflushing incident, and to just clean their cells_on a regular basis. Deputies would deny there request by responses such as Don't have the time now," "Talk to the next shift" or "My partner is busy", etc. Plaintiff never received any cleaning supplies the whole time he was incarcerated in Riverside Countys Detention Centers/Facilites. Plaintiff as well as other inmates would request grievances to file on the backflushing problem. Deputies never gave the plaintiff a grievance. Deputies custom practice was to state it's not a grievable issue. Case 5 Document 1 Filed 07/25/16 Page 8 of 16 Page ID 1 (6). Plaintiff as well as other inmates would request grievances to file $1 2 an the lack of cleaning supplies. Deputies never gave the plaintiff 3 Ta grievance. Deputies custom pratice was to state it's not a 4 grievable issue. 5 3 (7). The.Sheriff and Undersheriff, (Sniff and Yori) were the top policy 7 makers for the County's Detention Centers. These two had a policy 3 for the Detention Centers that was so deficient, that it allowed 9 the deputies at the Dentention Centers to never passout cleaning 10 supplies. Because the Procedure Manual never had a rountine schedule 11 for the cells to receive cleaning supplies. As stated a custom and 12 practices of finding excuses not to give out cleaning supplies was 13 the deputies daily routine. Since no routine schedule, no logs were 14 generated. 15 15 (8). V?ien a law-suit is filed against the Sheriff's Department, upon 17 service of the summons and complaint, the undersheriff receives a 18 copy and notifies the Sheriff. The Sheriff and Undersheriff was 19 notified of law?suit in 2011 (Bodnar v. Riverside County, EDCVF11- 20 0291, DSF (0P) to which the parties reached a 21 settlement after Defendant's lost summary judgment). 22 23 (9). The sheriff and Undersheriff knowingly of unsanitary living condition 24 alleged in the suit. Failed to cure, abate or break up the 25 custom and pratice that existed at RPDC LDS. This is the moving 25 force behind the unsanitary living conditions in cell living. 27 28 Case Document 1 Filed 07/25/16 Page 9 of 16 Page ID (10). (11). (12). (13). (14). (15). Since the Sheriff and UnderSheriff failed as stated in paragraph 9, left the condition to exist, to which the plaintiff was left to suffer, putting his health at risk of serious health problems. Deputies maintained a custom and/or pratice at RPDC and LDS to: (1) never passout cleaning supplies, (2) never do anything to abate the unsanitary living conditions and (3) never passed-out grievances when requested for these grievances. blocking the plaintiff from exhausting administrative remedies. The Sheriff or Undersheriff never broke up or set new policies and procedures for the deputies to put the inmates out of risk of serious health problems and future health problems. The Sheriff and UnderSheriff both operated, supervised and where individually the controlling authority of the Counties Detention Centers. Eadh failed in these duties and maintained unsanitary living conditions at LDS putting inmates at risk.of serious health problems and future health problems. They both failed to act after 2011. Defendants/and its agents or employees maintained as policy, pratice and custom county~wide that systematically fails to provbde the Plaintiff reasonable sanitary living conditions in the County's Dentention Facilities. Defendants/ and its agents or employees maintained as policy, pratice and custom county-wide that systematically fails to abate the unsanitary living condition caused by the backflushing problem 9. Case 5Document 1 Filed 07/25/16 Page 10 of 16 Page ID #:10 fails to provide the plaintiff sanitary living conditions in the County's Dentention Facilities. Sniff was an elected offical who failed to preform a statutory duty and are thus liable under Cal. Gov. Code 815.3. The breach of duty is from Cal. Gov. Code ?835 and 835.2 since liability exists against the public entity for negligent acts or ommissions of elected officals. Liability would then also apply to these elected officals as stated above and from Cal. Gov. Code 820.9. Plaintiff only uses these Cal.GOv;Code Statutes to support liability under Federal Constitutional or Statutory Law. Undersheriff Di Yori and sheriff Sniff, liability exist even without overt personal participation in the offense act because their implemented policy is so deficient, the policy itself is a prepudiation of constitutional rights and the moving force in the alleged deprivation in this action. (18). This complaint suggests and states that each Board Member and the Sheriff had been exposed to information concerning an alleged unsanitary living conditions in the County's Dentention Centers that puts inmates health and 'future health at risk of serious health problems, given sufficient evidence for a trier of fact to find knowledge. (Farmer vs. bennan (1994) 114 19?0, 1981). (19). Undersheriff and Sheriff is the Governing body for the county and it's Dentention Centers. All were the final policy-makers for the concerned alleged since 2011 and in this action. It is their conduct in the 10. Case Document 1 Filed 07/25/16 Page 11 of 16 Page ID #:final policy making that has established a custom and pratice of it's agents and employees which is the moving force behind the deprivation of constitutional rights alleged in this action. (Cortex vs. County of LA. (9th Cir.2002) 294 F.3d 1186,1188). deprivation of Federal constitutional rights against each Board Member and sheriff is based on their decisions or omissions in its policy that has established practices so persisent and wide? spread as to have deprivation the plaintiff of rights to SANITARY AND HUMAN LIVING GJNDITIONS . 11. Case Document 1 Filed 07/25/16 Page 12 of 16 Page ID #:12 CAUSE OF ACTION 1 2 CAUSE ONE 3 4 (21). Plaintiff repeats and alleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 5 inclusive to this complaint. 6 8 (22). As a direct result of each Defendant being deliberately indifferent 9 to Plaintiff's Constitutional right to sanitary living conditions in 10 the County's Detention Centers; Each defendant's actions and/or 11 inactions, their omission of official duty to care (Gov. Code 12 835), and a failure to atleast abate the sanitary living conditions, 13 along with.tte:policies and pratices that have been and continue to 14 be implemented by the defendant and its agents or employees in their 15 official/individual capacities, are the proximate cause of the 16 unreasonable risk of harm and future harm of a deprivations of 1? rights secured by the.Fburteenth Amendant under the Eight Amendment 18 Standards for a predetainee12. Case Document 1 Filed 07/25/16 Page 13 of 16 Page ID #:13 CAUSE TWO 1 2 3 (23). Plaintiff repeats and alleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 4 numbered inclusive to this complaint. 5 6 (24). As a direct result of each Defendant being deliberately indifferent to Plaintiff's constitutional right to sanitary living conditions 8 in the County Detention Facilities. Each defendant's actions and/or 9 inactions, their omissions of official duty to cure (Gov.Code ?835) 10 and a failure to atleast abate the sanitary living conditions,along 11 policies and practices that have been and continue to be implemented 12 by the defendant and its agents or employees in their offical/ 13 individual capacities, are proximate cause of unreasonable risk 14 of harm and future harm of a deprivation of rights secured by the 15 Fourteenth amendment under the Eight Amendment Standards for a 16 predetainee13. Case Document 1 Filed 07/25/16 Page 14 of 16 Page ID #:14 DEAR SIR 0R I am seeking help in a matter, I was Injuried in a work related incident on 8/31/2000. I filed a Worker's Compensation Claim, before it was settled out I was Incarcerated. I settled out for $a4,000.00 The Criminal Attorney 1 had at the time Jamie Harmon Took $20,000.00 by a unauthorized lein she was only contracted in my Criminal Case to get The rest went to Attorney fee's, Medical Bills, and to pay back my Workers Compensation Draws. (SO I GOT ZERO). There was also to be a claim filed for the Serious and Willful Misconduct of the Employer. My Worker's Compensation Attorney never filed this claim, in 2007 I, received a letter from him (ATTORNEY) that states: We can not file Activate your claim for Serious and Willful Misconduct of the Employer due to your being unavailable.? (Incarcerated). Did this Attorney mess up my filing of claim Is it to late now to file the Serious and Willful Claim or will the court accept it because it's the attorney's fault and not mine Also the Attorney whom took my Money by bogus Li?n has been Disbarred and can no longer pratice Law. I am soon to be released and will need counsel to Pursue my Claims of Serious and Willful Misconduct against a Major San Jose area Construction Company. PLEASE SINCERELY, Case Documentl Filed 07/25/16 Page 15 of 16 IS -I-I purpusu nl' ranrutIng the curl dnukcl slrect am CIVIL COVER SHEET Thu: IS 44 cu r cm'ur 511ch and 1h: unmarried nurther replace and ?cnlut or other papers as by Ian. as ruch cmrr?l I lunr'r. upprmed the 0 Ilrr: htulug In I?l'r'I. IS for Ihc u5r: uI?Ihe Clerk c-I'Courl [he OF THIS mm? 1 I. PLAINTIFFS RONY KHNEISER {In of uI?I-?rrsl Plurnu?' r};th 5. PL (C) 5 fFr'r'nr .?L'rrn'rc'. Turrep'r'rorrc' IN PRO PER DEFENDANTS (Ilm?Y OF RIVERSIDE DEPT.), SIAN SNIFF (SHERIFF), WILLIAM DI YURI County ut'Firsr Del'cndunl r? I15. TIFF CISES 0x1 I IND CASES. THE LIICATIOIN OF THF. TRACT OF LAND ED. BISGAARD SMITH 650 E. HOSPIALITY LANE, SUITE 600 SAN 92408 I r?erCerm r'rI Orrc? Bur Orrin FudcruI 'l-I a Du chill) a! r'rr hem CITIZENSHIP 0F PRINCIPAL PARTIES r'Pr'rrceua 0m- Burr rau- Phrr'mr'lrf (For Dr'r'srsr'rr.? (use: Huh I and Um- Bm? .fm' PT if?: DEF ul' IIus Slam . I I Incorporated or Pnnciprrl Flue: I I Busincss 'I'Ilrs 1 I '1 3 r1an Pnnuiprll Plant 1 of Busurcss In .3rnL1II'rL-r Starr: Fruzcn or Subject oh; 3 1 anrnn E: Fnr?lur'r I 1" RTS FUR FEITLREIFEYA (1TH ER. 51' TEE I .1 I Insurance PERSUXU. PERSONAL INJL RY 3 I135 Dung: Ra-Iatcd Emma :l 431 AppcaI I53 '1 RTS False Clam-rs Aer Marmc El 3115 Injur) - ol'Pmpen} ll SC 33] 1 $23 rlhrira? ul :l 4m} Sum: RL-aprmnigmnunr 3 I30 Jul 3 If .Krrlenr: Pmducl LmhlIrlg. 69'? Udlcr 33 l3" 1 7' I40 ch?li?bld I '1 3-67 Ilqulh 2' Banks and 3 It?) Rccm'cr) ul'UwrpuijL-rrl 32?- I.rI'rcI PIrrmnacculrcaI PROPERTY RIGHTS 1 450 Comma? r5; Ul' Slander Personal Injury 1 HID :1 If?) Deportatian 1 ISI .?I-chrcurc .Icl 330 Federal Fmle crs' Prudqu 33? P;Ilr:rrl :1 470 Raukurccr In?uenced II: Raul-cf} u-I'Dclhullcd 1 .163 ?lm-slog. Personal ('umrpr Org-.rnrzurrum Srmtenl Loans 2' 14? Mann: Injury Prnduct :l 4311 L'mrsunmr 'l 345 anc Pruducr I AHUR SOCIAL 'l 490 I'ahlc S?u rk' :l Ream cl}: crpur. 71"! Farr Lalrur Slundurds SIJI HI I I IFLISITI :l 85" I'umnrurirlrus Bend?l? 35?] Molar 370 U1Irur Fraud Act :3 3h: Black Lung r923} Exchange Ian Suns FTI anrll :l '1'th L?b?f 1 DIW r-IlIJ'rgrr 1 [lrhur' Acrmm 1 Utl'nrrl'mumci Prudu? .130 Pursnnul Relurmns 3 3M 391 Agngulruu] .1 I93 Product Lialullr} TI 1m} I?crsurml Damage 3 Hall?. a} Lahur Act Sui RSI Ha?z?; all; Injury. 335 Propun} During: FquI} and Medical 3 39:" Freedom Jul Pcmmal - Prudu? Lem: .Icl .?Lcl 790 Dillcr LaIJur Arbitralrun I REAL PROPERTY CIVIL RIGHTS PRISONER. PETITIONS -I 791 Emplu}. cc FEDERAL TAX [Jr-mature ll? Land 440 L'n II Hahnm Corpus: Income Securrly .?uzr 3"0 Taxes rL? Fr Plamnl?f .Jrct Renew or App-cu! of 330 Fortulnsurr: 1 HI Voting 3 4h} nr Dethndaun -\g_enuy Decimal} 3.1? Rent Lease 442 Employ menl 5 ,?xlulrmu Vacalc TI P'me 1 95:] Cm'lstnullnnuluv at? Tom'- [0 Land 3 44.1 Iquerrg 16 I '50 760?] Slab: Slumth I 3 EH Tort Product 530 General. 3 MI Rn! Propcrt} :l - 535 Death Penalty FmpJu} 4va -?unr:r Ullrer 443 (Imam-arr Other: 5 It} \Irrndarnus .2 Other 550Cr11IRJyIrrs 535 Prism: [Tnndilmn :1 550 full Dclairlct - of 1 Hr: '3 405 Other 19'. {PIrJL'crm ".Imfrr Una 3m: Orir'r') 3r Pran ted mg VI. CAUSE OF ACTION 2' 2' Rumm?rcd [rum 13 Cuur?L VII. REQLTESTED IN COMPLAINT: Care [ha I) {Can 42 use I083 of cause ANITARY LIVING CONDITIONS Remandcd from Court 3 I or 6 :l 5 Transferred I'mm AnolI'rrer Rcupc ed under ?Inch 3.0? arr: ?lrng (Du mu ?annex diverr?p CI CHECK IF THIS IS CLASS ACTION UNDER RULE 13. CV RELATED CASEIS) IF ANY JULY 12,2016 r52:- JUDGE DALE S. DEMAND 75,000.00 CHECK YES only rt'dcmandcd Ln DEMANDAMOUNT RNEY OF RECORD - 3 APPLTIING IL DEF JL. DUI: Case Document 1 Filed 07/25/16 Page 16 of 16 Page ID #:16 we . na?w {and 1m. 6 J?nmd {.3me r- x, i . my. #436 10 Md?d mate m, 13+ 33 13%de Excenaf? do. _w yn? d@ on lLvU 4.0ijng 325% ra/E>