Murphy v. Nunley et al
ORDER that the Clerk shall mail the 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint form to Plaintiff with this order. If Plaintiff wishes to amend her complaint, she may complete the new complaint form in its entirety in accordance with this order, mark it as "Amended Complaint," and file within 30 days of the date of this order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe on 1/25/2016. (lej)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
LISA RYAN MURPHY, ADC # 760343
McPherson Unit; et al.
Lisa Murphy (“Plaintiff”) filed this action pro se and pursuant to 42 U.S.C. section 1983.
(Doc. No. 2.) She also filed an Application to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees and Affidavit
(“Application”) (Doc. No. 1). Plaintiff is a “three-striker” within the meaning of the Prison
Litigation Reform Act.1 However, she is eligible to proceed in this action because, based on her
current allegations, she falls within the imminent danger exception. See Martin v. Shelton, 319 F.3d
1048, 1050 (8th Cir. 2003); Ashley v. Dilworth, 147 F.3d 715, 717 (8th Cir. 1998). Nevertheless,
before proceeding further, I invite Plaintiff to amend her Complaint in order to clarify several issues.
First, Plaintiff repeatedly refers to this action as a state tort action. (Doc. No. 2 at 10, 15.)
Indeed, her Application has been submitted on state court forms. (Doc. No. 1 at 1-3.) She should
clarify whether she intended this action to be brought in federal or state court. Second, Plaintiff has
named no fewer than twenty-four Defendants to this action. The only allegations against many of
these Defendants are that they have knowledge of Plaintiff’s purported medical issues and have
failed to take corrective action. (Doc. No. 2 at 17.) These claims amount to little more than lengthy
See Murphy v. Faust, et al., 1:14CV00127-JM; Murphy v. Kelly et al., 1:15CV00044-JM;
and Murphy v. Hot Springs County, 6:11CV06049-RTD.
strings of names without factual context2 and, as such, are insufficiently pleaded. See Bell Atlantic
Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007). If any of these claims are to proceed, Plaintiff must
elaborate on them. Finally, Plaintiff raises a number of separate claims and it is not clear that they
are sufficiently related to proceed in a single action. She claims: (1) on an unspecified date
Defendants Nunley and Hall gave her a shot to which she did not consent and which caused her
nerve and kidney damage; (2) two weeks after the shot Defendants Lad and Hall delayed in
providing medical assistance to Plaintiff because of their disdain for her; (3) four weeks after the shot
Defendant Baumgardner gave her incorrect medication, refused to acknowledge the mistake, and
incited other inmates to retaliate against Plaintiff for complaining; and (4) Defendants Baumgardner,
Lad, and Hall are now attempting to poison her by way of her prescribed medications. (Doc. No. 2
at 10-15.) Claims against multiple defendants must arise from the same transaction or occurrence.
See Fed. R. Civ. P. 20(a)(2).
Plaintiff, if she chooses, may submit to the Court, within thirty (30) days of the entry date
of this Order, a superseding Amended Complaint which complies with this Order and contains all
of her claims against all defendants she is suing in a single document. Plaintiff is cautioned that an
Amended Complaint renders her original Complaint without legal effect. Only claims properly set
out in the Amended Complaint will be allowed to proceed. If she fails to file an Amended
Complaint, I will screen her allegations as they stand and some of her claims may be dismissed.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the Clerk shall mail the 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint
form to Plaintiff with this Order. If Plaintiff wishes to amend her Complaint, she may complete the
new complaint form in its entirety in accordance with this Order, mark it as “Amended Complaint,”
Relevant factual context would include dates, times, and the actual response (if any) which
Plaintiff received from these Defendants.
and file within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order.
DATED this 25th day of January, 2016.
JOE J. VOLPE
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
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?