SMITH v. SMITH et al
Filing
96
ENTRY Discussing Complaint and Dismissing Certain Claims - Claims against offenders M. Jackson and C. Watkins must be dismissed. Claims against Superintendent Jeff Wrigley must be dismissed. All claims for injunctive relief and any claims agains t the defendants in their official capacities must be dismissed. Claims for money damages alleged against Jennifer Smith and Daphne Tester in their individual capacities shall proceed as submitted. No partial final judgment shall issue at this time as to the claims resolved in this Entry. (copy to Plaintiff via US Mail). Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 3/8/2012. (JKS)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
ERIC D. SMITH,
v.
Plaintiff,
JENNIFER SMITH et al.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No. 1:10-cv-256-JMS-MJD
Entry Discussing Complaint and Dismissing Certain Claims
Eric Smith, an inmate at Wabash Valley Correctional Facility, brings this
lawsuit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging that the defendants, officials and
inmates at the New Castle Correctional Facility (“New Castle”), violated his
constitutional rights by providing inadequate access to the courts and by retaliating
against him. Jennifer Smith, Jeff Wrigley, C. Watkins #968821, Daphne Tester, and
M. Jackson are named as defendants. The plaintiff seeks money damages and
injunctive relief.
Title 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) directs that the court dismiss a complaint or any
claim within a complaint which "(1) is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim
upon which relief may be granted; or (2) seeks monetary relief from a defendant who
is immune from such relief." Lagerstrom v. Kingston, 463 F.3d 621, 624 (7th Cir.
2006). To satisfy the notice-pleading standard of Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure, a complaint must provide a “short and plain statement of the claim
showing that the pleader is entitled to relief,” which is sufficient to provide the
defendant with “fair notice” of the claim and its basis. Erickson, 551 U.S. at 93 (per
curiam) (citing Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007) and quoting Fed.
R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2)). The complaint “must actually suggest that the plaintiff has a right
to relief, by providing allegations that raise a right to relief above the speculative
level.” Windy City Metal Fabricators & Supply, Inc. v. CIT Tech. Fin. Servs., 536 F.3d
663, 668 (7th Cir. 2008) (quoting Tamayo v. Blagojevich, 526 F.3d 1074, 1084 (7th
Cir. 2008)). Pro se complaints are construed liberally and held to a less stringent
standard than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers. Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89,
94 (2007); Obriecht v. Raemisch, 517 F.3d 489, 491 n. 2 (7th Cir.2008).
To state a claim under ' 1983, a plaintiff must allege the violation of a right
secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States and must show that the
alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under color of state law. West
v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988). AThe color of state law element is a threshold issue;
there is no liability under [Section] 1983 for those not acting under color of law.@
Groman v. Twp. of Manalapan, 47 F.3d 628, 638 (3d Cir. 1995). A person acts under
color of state law only when exercising power Apossessed by virtue of state law and
made possible only because the wrongdoer is clothed with the authority of state law.@
United States v. Classic, 313 U.S. 299, 326 (1941).
Applying the standard set forth above, certain claims alleged in the complaint
must be dismissed. These claims include the following:
•
Claims against offenders M. Jackson and C. Watkins must be
dismissed because these defendants, under the circumstances alleged,
did not act Aunder color of state law” while working a prison job. Any
other conclusion would be fatuous.
•
Claims against Superintendent Jeff Wrigley must be dismissed
because the complaint does not allege that Superintendent Wrigley
personally participated in the alleged unconstitutional conduct or
directed it to occur. To be liable for a constitutional violation, an
individual must have personally participated in the conduct or it must
have occurred at his direction. Starzenski v. City of Elkhart, 87 F.3d
872, 879 (7th Cir. 1996) (A>An individual cannot be held liable in a [42
U.S.C.] ' 1983 action unless he caused or participated in [the] alleged
constitutional deprivation.=@) (quoting Wolf-Lillie v. Sonquist, 699 F.2d
864, 869 (7th Cir. 1983)). To the extent the Superintendent is included
as a defendant because of his supervisory position, this position alone is
not adequate to support the imposition of liability. See West v. Waymire,
114 F.3d 646, 649 (7th Cir. 1997)("the doctrine of respondeat superior is
not available to a plaintiff in a section 1983 suit").
•
The plaintiff purports to sue each defendant in their personal capacity
for damages and in their official capacity for declaratory and injunctive
relief. All claims for injunctive relief and any claims against the
defendants in their official capacities must be dismissed. The
plaintiff=s request for injunctive relief has been rendered moot because
he is no longer incarcerated at New Castle Correctional Facility. Brown
v. Bartholomew Consol. Sch. Corp., 442 F.3d 588, 596 (7th Cir. 2006)
(AIn an action seeking only injunctive relief . . . once the threat of the act
sought to be enjoined dissipates, the suit must be dismissed as moot. If,
however, a plaintiff also seeks monetary damages, his case is not moot
even if the underlying misconduct that caused the injury has ceased.@)
(citations omitted); see also Arreola v. Godinez, 546 F.3d 788, 799 (7th
Cir. 2008); Lehn v. Holmes, 364 F.3d 862, 871 (7th Cir. 2004) ("[W]hen a
prisoner who seeks injunctive relief for a condition specific to a
particular prison is transferred out of that prison, the need for relief . . .
become[s] moot."); Higgason v. Farley, 83 F.3d 862, 871 (7th Cir. 1996)
(same)
Claims for money damages alleged against Jennifer Smith and
Daphne Tester in their individual capacities shall proceed as submitted.
No partial final judgment shall issue at this time as to the claims resolved in
this Entry.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
03/08/2012
Date: __________________
_______________________________
Distribution:
Bruce Benjamin Paul
bpaul@stites.com
Eric D. Smith
DOC #112675
Wabash Valley - CF
6908 S. Old U.S. Highway 41
P.O. Box 500
Carlisle, IN 47838
Hon. Jane Magnus-Stinson, Judge
United States District Court
Southern District of Indiana
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?