Warren v. Doe et al

Filing 4

ORDER directing Mr. Warren to amend his complaint within thirty days to cure the defects identified by the Court. His failure to comply with the Court Order could result in the dismissal of this lawsuit. Signed by Magistrate Judge Beth Deere on 5/14/2014. (jak)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
JONESBORO DIVISION
HENRY W. WARREN
V.

PLAINTIFF
CASE NO. 3:14-CV-128 KGB/BD

DOE, et al.

DEFENDANTS
ORDER

Henry W. Warren filed this lawsuit pro se under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that
his constitutional rights were violated while he was housed at the Mississippi County
Detention Facility. (Docket entry #2) Specifically, he claims that Detention Facility
officials failed to protect him from an attack by a fellow inmate.
Mr. Warren’s Complaint, as written, does not provide enough information for the
Court to determine whether he can state a federal claim for relief. He will have an
opportunity, however, to amend his Complaint.
The Eighth Amendment requires prison officials to take “reasonable measures to
guarantee the safety of the inmates [and] . . . to protect prisoners from violence at the
hands of other prisoners.” Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 832–33, 114 S.Ct. 1970
(1994) (quotations omitted). In order to establish a constitutional violation, however, Mr.
Warren must show that he faced a substantial risk of serious harm and that Detention
Facility officials actually knew of that risk, but disregarded, or were deliberately
indifferent to, his health or safety. Pagels v. Morrison, 335 F.3d 736, 740 (8th Cir. 2003);
Jackson v. Everett, 140 F.3d 1149, 1151 (8th Cir. 1998).

Here, Mr. Warren has not included any facts indicating that the named Defendants
were aware of a threat posed by inmate Henderson, the individual who attacked Mr.
Warren. Without those allegations, Mr. Warren’s claim fails.
Accordingly, Mr. Warren has thirty days to amend his complaint to cure the
defects identified by the Court. His failure to comply with the Court order could result in
the dismissal of this lawsuit. See Local Rule 5.5.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 14th day of May, 2014.

___________________________________
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2