Kampwerth v. Madison County Jail

Filing 9

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Complaint (Doc. 1) and COUNT 1 are DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that MADISON COUNTY JAIL is DISMISSED from this action with prejudice f or the reasons stated above. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, should he wish to proceed with this case, Plaintiff shall file a First Amended Complaint, stating any facts which may exist to support a cognizable § 1983 claim, within 28 days of the ent ry of this order (on or before March 1, 2018). Should Plaintiff fail to file his First Amended Complaint within the allotted time or consistent with the instructions set forth in this Order, the entire case shall be dismissed with prejudice for failure to comply with a court order and/or for failure to prosecute his claims. (Amended Pleadings due by 3/1/2018). Signed by Judge J. Phil Gilbert on 1/31/2018. (tjk)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
WILLIAM KAMPWERTH,
Plaintiff,
vs.
MADISON COUNTY JAIL,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 18−cv–11−JPG

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
GILBERT, District Judge:
Plaintiff William Kampwerth, an inmate in Madison County Jail, brings this action
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for alleged deprivations of his constitutional rights.

In his

Complaint, Plaintiff claims the defendant was deliberately indifferent to his serious medical
needs in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. (Doc. 1). This case is now before the Court
for a preliminary review of the Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, which provides:
(a) Screening – The court shall review, before docketing, if feasible or, in any
event, as soon as practicable after docketing, a complaint in a civil action in which a
prisoner seeks redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a
governmental entity.
(b) Grounds for Dismissal – On review, the court shall identify
cognizable claims or dismiss the complaint, or any portion of the complaint, if the
complaint–
(1) is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim on which
relief may be granted; or
(2) seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune
from such relief.
An action or claim is frivolous if “it lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact.”
Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989). Frivolousness is an objective standard that refers
to a claim that any reasonable person would find meritless. Lee v. Clinton, 209 F.3d 1025, 10261

27 (7th Cir. 2000). An action fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted if it does not
plead “enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” Bell Atlantic Corp. v.
Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007). The claim of entitlement to relief must cross “the line
between possibility and plausibility.” Id. at 557. At this juncture, the factual allegations of the
pro se complaint are to be liberally construed. See Rodriguez v. Plymouth Ambulance Serv., 577
F.3d 816, 821 (7th Cir. 2009).
Upon careful review of the Complaint and any supporting exhibits, the Court finds that
the Complaint is subject to summary dismissal.
The Complaint
In his Complaint (Doc. 1), Plaintiff makes the following allegations: “[s]ince February 5,
2014, [Plaintiff] was asking for [his] shot of Invega” in Madison County Jail. (Doc. 1, p. 5).
Plaintiff claims his daughters almost lost him because “this county could not give [him his]
medicine.” Id. In the “Grievance Procedure” section of the Complaint, Plaintiff also notes that
he let the captain know that he needed his shot, but that “they kept denying me.” Id. As a result,
Plaintiff hung himself, and “they sent [him] to Chester Mental Health Center, and know [sic]
they are giving [him his] shot.” Id.
Plaintiff seeks monetary damages for himself and his two daughters. Id.
Discussion
Based on the allegations of the Complaint, the Court finds it convenient to designate a
single count in this pro se action. The parties and the Court will use this designation in all future
pleadings and orders, unless otherwise directed by a judicial officer of this Court. The
designation of this count does not constitute an opinion regarding its merit.
Count 1 –

Defendant showed deliberate indifference to Plaintiff’s serious medical
need in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment by failing to give him his
2

shot of Invega, resulting in him attempting to hang himself.
As discussed in more detail below, Count 1 will be dismissed without prejudice for
failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Any other intended claim that has not
been recognized by the Court is considered dismissed without prejudice as inadequately pleaded
under the Twombly pleading standard.
Count 1
The Court need not get to the merits of Plaintiff’s deliberate indifference claim in this
action because he has failed to name a proper defendant. Madison County Jail is not an
appropriate defendant in this case. A jail is not a “person” under § 1983. Smith v. Knox Cnty.
Jail, 666 F.3d 1037, 1040 (7th Cir. 2012); Powell v. Cook Cnty. Jail, 814 F. Supp. 757, 758
(N.D. Ill. 1993). It is not a legal entity in the first place and is therefore not amenable to suit.
Accordingly, Madison County Jail will be dismissed with prejudice, and Count 1 will be
dismissed without prejudice.
Pending Motions
Plaintiff filed an unsigned Motion for Recruitment of Counsel (Doc. 3) that is hereby
STRICKEN for noncompliance with Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Rule
11(a) requires that “[e]very pleading, written motion, and other paper must be signed . . . by a
party personally if the party is unrepresented.”
Disposition
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Complaint (Doc. 1) and COUNT 1 are
DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that MADISON COUNTY JAIL is DISMISSED from
this action with prejudice for the reasons stated above.

3

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, should he wish to proceed with this case, Plaintiff
shall file a First Amended Complaint, stating any facts which may exist to support a cognizable §
1983 claim, within 28 days of the entry of this order (on or before March 1, 2018). Should
Plaintiff fail to file his First Amended Complaint within the allotted time or consistent with the
instructions set forth in this Order, the entire case shall be dismissed with prejudice for failure to
comply with a court order and/or for failure to prosecute his claims. FED. R. APP. P. 41(b). See
generally Ladien v. Astrachan, 128 F.3d 1051 (7th Cir. 1997); Johnson v. Kamminga, 34 F.3d
466 (7th Cir. 1994); 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). Such dismissal shall count as one of Plaintiff’s
three allotted “strikes” within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) because Plaintiff has thus far
failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted in this case.
Should Plaintiff decide to file a First Amended Complaint, it is strongly recommended
that he use the forms designed for use in this District for such actions. He should label the form,
“First Amended Complaint,” and he should use the case number for this action (i.e. 18-cv-11JPG). The pleading shall present each claim in a separate count, and each count shall specify, by
name, the defendant alleged to be liable under the count, as well as the actions alleged to have
been taken by that defendant. Plaintiff should attempt to include the facts of his case in
chronological order, inserting each defendant’s name where necessary to identify the actors.
Plaintiff should refrain from filing unnecessary exhibits. Plaintiff should include only related
claims in his new complaint. Claims found to be unrelated to one another will be severed into
new cases, new case numbers will be assigned, and additional filing fees will be assessed.
An amended complaint supersedes and replaces the original complaint, rendering the
original complaint void. See Flannery v. Recording Indus. Ass’n of Am., 354 F.3d 632, 638 n.1
(7th Cir. 2004). The Court will not accept piecemeal amendments to a complaint. Thus, the

4

First Amended Complaint must stand on its own, without reference to any previous pleading, and
Plaintiff must re-file any exhibits he wishes the Court to consider along with the First Amended
Complaint. The First Amended Complaint is subject to review pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.
No service shall be ordered on any defendant until after the Court completes its § 1915A review
of the First Amended Complaint.
Plaintiff is further ADVISED that his obligation to pay the filing fee for this action was
incurred at the time the action was filed, thus the filing fee of $350.00 remains due and payable,
regardless of whether Plaintiff elects to file a First Amended Complaint.

See 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(b)(1); Lucien v. Jockisch, 133 F.3d 464, 467 (7th Cir. 1998).
Finally, Plaintiff is ADVISED that he is under a continuing obligation to keep the Clerk
of Court and each opposing party informed of any change in his address; the Court will not
independently investigate his whereabouts. This shall be done in writing and not later than
7 days after a transfer or other change in address occurs. Failure to comply with this order will
cause a delay in the transmission of court documents and may result in dismissal of this action
for want of prosecution. See FED. R. CIV. P. 41(b).
In order to assist Plaintiff in preparing his amended complaint, the Clerk is DIRECTED
to mail Plaintiff a blank civil rights complaint form.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: January 31, 2018
s/J. Phil Gilbert
United States District Judge

5