Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
Plaintiff Tessiejarra Mack, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this complaint in October 2026 against Sacramento County Main Jail, Sacramento Sheriff Jim Cooper, and the California Department of Public Health. The complaint arises from the death of Mack’s son, Smiley Martin IV, on June 8, 2024, while he was housed at the Sacramento County Jail.
Mack alleges that Martin was involved in a fatal shooting in 2022 and had previously successfully sued the Jail, and that an officer involved in that prior lawsuit was employed at the Jail at the time of Martin’s death. The court screened the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) and the pleading standards of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2) and Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly.
The Court’s Holding
The court dismissed the complaint with leave to amend and granted the plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis. The court identified two primary deficiencies: first, the action appears barred by the statute of limitations, as California Code of Civil Procedure § 335.1 prescribes a two-year limitation period for wrongful death actions, and the complaint was filed in October 2026—over two years after the June 2024 death.
Second, the plaintiff, proceeding pro se, cannot legally represent her deceased son’s estate or his interests, as courts consistently hold that a pro se litigant may only represent themselves. The court ordered the plaintiff to file a First Amended Complaint or a notice of voluntary dismissal within fourteen days, warning that failure to do so would result in a recommendation of dismissal for failure to state a claim.
Key Takeaways
- The complaint was dismissed without prejudice for failure to state a claim, primarily due to statute of limitations and standing/representation defects.
- California’s two-year statute of limitations for wrongful death (Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 335.1) appears to bar the action filed over two years after the decedent’s death.
- A pro se plaintiff cannot represent a decedent’s estate; counsel is required to pursue claims on behalf of an estate.
- The court granted in forma pauperis status, finding the plaintiff made the required showing.
- The plaintiff has 14 days to file an amended complaint that supersedes the original or a notice of voluntary dismissal.
Why It Matters
This screening order illustrates the application of mandatory § 1915(e) screening to pro se prisoner civil rights complaints, highlighting two common procedural hurdles: compliance with state statutes of limitations borrowed for federal civil rights claims, and the requirement that estates be represented by licensed counsel. The order provides the plaintiff a narrow window to cure these defects, but signals that the limitations bar may be insurmountable absent equitable tolling arguments not yet raised. The ruling also reinforces Ninth Circuit precedent that liberal construction of pro se pleadings does not permit courts to supply essential elements of a claim, such as proper party representation.
The order does not finally dismiss the action or decide whether tolling might apply. It gives Mack fourteen days to file a complete amended complaint or a notice of voluntary dismissal, and warns that failure to respond will lead to a recommendation of dismissal. Any amended pleading must explain Mack’s legal basis for bringing claims connected to her son’s death and address the apparent timing problem.