Bishop v. Jefferies et al

Filing 12

ORDER: Bishop's vague and conclusory allegations of inadequate medical care are dismissed without prejudice because he has not explained what type of medical care he needs or who failed to provide him with that care. Bishop's access-to-the- courts claim is dismissed without prejudice because he has not suffered an actual injury as a result of being denied access to a law library. Bishop's claim that defendants are not properly responding to his grievances is dismissed without prej udice. Bishop's claims that defendants provided him with dirty matts, interfered with his legal mail, retaliated against him for filing this lawsuit, and otherwise violated his constitutional rights after he commenced this action on 5 February 2015 are dismissed without prejudice. Bishop may proceed on his failure-to-protect claim against Croslin, Bailey, and Wilson in their individual capacities only. All official capacity claims are dismissed without prejudice. Sheriff Jeffries is dismi ssed as a defendant without prejudice. The Clerk is directed to prepare a summons for Wilson, Croslin, and Bailey. The U.S. Marshal is directed to serve the summons, complaint, amended complaint, second amended complaint, and this Order on them without prepayment of fees and costs or security therefor. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 4/20/2015. (jak)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
NORTHER DIVISION
RICHMOND BISHOP
ADC #650733
v.

PLAINTIFF
No. 1:15-cv-20-DPM-JTR

STEVEN JEFFERIES, Sheriff, Independence
County Sheriff's Department; SISSY WILSON,
Assistant Jail Administrator, Independence
County Jail; LYNN CROSLIN, Sergeant,
Independence County Jail; and ZACH BAILEY,
Baliff/J ailer, Independence County Jail

DEFENDANTS

ORDER
1. Bishop has filed this pro se § 1983 action alleging that defendants
violated his constitutional rights at the Independence County Jail. NQ 2, 5 &
9. The Court must screen Bishop's complaint. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.

2. Bishop's vague and conclusory allegations of inadequate medical care
are dismissed without prejudice because he has not explained what type of
medical care he needs or who failed to provide him with that care. Ashcroft
v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009).

3. Bishop's access-to-the-courts claim is dismissed without prejudice
because he has not suffered an actual injury as a result of being denied access
to a law library. Hartsfield v. Nichols, 511 F.3d 826, 831-32 (8th Cir. 2008).

4. Bishop's claim that defendants are not properly responding to his
grievances is dismissed without prejudice. Prisoners do not have a
constitutional right to a prison grievance procedure. Lomholt v. Holder, 287
F.3d 683, 684 (8th Cir. 2002) (per curiam).
5. Bishop's claims that defendants provided him with dirty matts,
interfered with his legal mail, retaliated against him for filing this lawsuit, and
otherwise violated his constitutional rights after he commenced this action on
5 February 2015 are dismissed without prejudice. Bishop must raise those
claims in another lawsuit, after he has properly exhausted or attempted to
exhaust his administrative remedies within the Independence County Jail. 42
U.S.C. § 1997e(a); Johnson v. Jones, 340 F.3d 624, 627 (8th Cir. 2003).
6. Bishop has pleaded a plausible§ 1983 claim that Croslin, Bailey, and
Wilson failed to protect him from being attacked by his cell mate on 15
January 2015. Bishop does not suggest that the attack was caused by an
Independence County policy, practice, or custom. He therefore may proceed
with his failure-to-protect claim against Croslin, Bailey, and Wilson in their
individual capacities only. All official capacity claims are dismissed without
prejudice. Szabla v. City of Brooklyn Park, Minnesota, 486 F.3d 385,390-91 (8th

-2-

Cir. 2007).
7. Because there is no vicarious liability in § 1983 actions, a prisoner
must allege that each defendant "through the official's own individual
actions, has violated the Constitution." Parrish v. Ball, 594 F.3d 993, 1001.
Bishop has not pleaded any facts suggesting that Sheriff Jefferies was
personally involved in the alleged failure to protect him from the January
2015 attack. Sheriff Jefferies is therefore dismissed as a defendant without
prejudice.
8. The Clerk is directed to prepare a summons for Wilson, Croslin, and

Bailey. The U.S. Marshal is directed to serve the summons, complaint,
amended complaint, second amended complaint, and this Order on them
without prepayment of fees and costs or security therefor. If any of the
defendants are no longer county employees, the individual responding to
service must file the unserved defendant's last known private mailing address
under seal.

So Ordered.

D.P. Marshall Jr. I'
United States District Judge

-3-