Brady v. Hobbs et al

Filing 5

ORDER directing Plaintiff to amend his complaint within thirty days pursuant to the instructions contained in this Order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Beth Deere on 3/21/2014. (jak)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
PINE BLUFF DIVISION
ROBERT JEFFREY BRADY
ADC #116780
V.

PLAINTIFF

CASE NO. 5:14-CV-0103 JLH/BD

RAY HOBBS, et al.

DEFENDANTS
ORDER

Robert Jeffrey Brady, an Arkansas Department of Correction (“ADC”) inmate,
filed this lawsuit pro se alleging that Defendants failed to protect him from being attacked
by another ADC inmate. As a result of the attack, Mr. Brady claims that his leg had to be
amputated. Mr. Brady’s complaint, however, is flawed and must be amended.
First, Mr. Brady asks for compensatory and punitive damages, but he names the
Defendants in their official capacities only. Mr. Brady cannot recover monetary damages
against a state actor in his official capacity. Will v. Michigan Dep’t of State Police, 491
U.S. 58, 109 S.Ct. 2304 (1989).
Second, based on the allegations contained in his complaint, it is unclear whether
Mr. Brady seeks to pursue a claim regarding the Defendants’ failure to provide him
adequate medical treatment.
Third, although Mr. Brady names Ray Hobbs as a Defendant, it appears that he
seeks to hold him liable based on his supervisory position within the ADC. In a § 1983
action, a supervisor cannot be held liable for the constitutional violations of a subordinate
based solely on the employment relationship. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 1948

(2009); Parrish v. Ball, 594 F.3d 993, 1001 (8th Cir. 2010); see also Keeper v. King, 130
F.3d 1309, 1314 (8th Cir. 1997) (holding that the “general responsibility for supervising
the operations of a prison is insufficient to establish the personal involvement required to
support [§ 1983] liability”). Therefore, a prisoner “must plead that each
Government-official defendant, through the official’s own individual actions, has violated
the Constitution.” Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. at 1948.
Accordingly, Mr. Brady must amend his complaint. In his amended complaint, he
must specifically state whether he is using the Defendants in their individual capacities.
Further, he must clarify whether he is suing Defendants only for failing to protect him or
whether he is also claiming that Defendants failed to provide adeuqate medical treatment.
Mr. Brady must specifically explain how each named Defendant violated his
constitutional rights and caused him injury. Mr. Brady must file an amended complaint
within thirty days.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 21st day of March, 2014.

___________________________________
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2