Bridgeman v. Neldon et al

Filing 4

ORDER directing Plaintiff Bridgeman to file an amended complaint within thirty days of the entry of this Order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Beth Deere on 2/19/2014. (jak)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS NORTHERN DIVISION DAVID BRIDGEMAN ADC #152683 V. PLAINTIFF CASE NO. 1:14-CV-0011 KGB/BD CORPORAL NELDON, et al. DEFENDANTS ORDER Mr. Bridgeman filed this lawsuit pro se under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Docket entry #2) He claims that ADC officials violated his rights by failing to protect him from an attack by other inmates, even though he warned them that such an attack would take place if officials transferred him to a certain barracks. There are problems with the complaint, as drafted. First, Mr. Bridgeman names Corporal Neldon as a Defendant, but does not mention Corporal Neldon in the body of his complaint. It is unclear, therefore, how this Defendant violated Mr. Bridgeman’s rights. In addition, he alleges that an unidentified corporal assured him that he would inform ADC staff about the potential harm in transferring him and that an unidentified sergeant ordered that he be transferred. Based on these allegations, the Court cannot perform its screening function under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Mr. Bridgeman appears to have stated an Eighth Amendment claim, but he has not identified the individuals who allegedly violated his rights. Without this information, this case cannot move forward. Accordingly, Mr. Bridgeman has thirty days to amend his complaint to identify those officials who allegedly violated his constitutional rights and caused him to suffer injury. His failure to amend his complaint could result in the dismissal of his claims, without prejudice. IT IS SO ORDERED this 19th day of February, 2014. ___________________________________ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?