CHARLES v. GEO GROUP, INC. et al
Filing
4
ENTRY - granting Plaintiff's 2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. The plaintiff is assessed an initial partial filing fee of Two Dollars and Forty-Nine Cents ($2.49). He shall have through June 6, 2014, in which to pay th is sum to the clerk of the district court. The claims against GEO Group are DISMISSED. The dismissal of the complaint will not in this instance result in the dismissal of the action. Instead, the plaintiff shall have through June 24, 2014, in which to file an amended complaint. **SEE ENTRY** copy mailed. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 6/3/2014. (ADH)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION
ELMER D. CHARLES,
Plaintiff,
vs.
GEO GROUP, INC.,
NEW CASTLE CORRECTIONALFACILITY
c/o Superintendent, Keith Butts,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. 1:14-cv-00876-TWP-DML
Entry Dismissing Complaint and Directing Further Proceedings
I.
The plaintiff=s motion to proceed in forma pauperis [dkt. 2] is granted. The plaintiff is
assessed an initial partial filing fee of Two Dollars and Forty-Nine Cents ($2.49). He shall have
through June 6, 2014, in which to pay this sum to the clerk of the district court.
II.
Plaintiff Elmer D. Charles, an inmate at the New Castle Correctional Facility, filed this
civil action against the “Geo Group, Inc., New Castle Correctional Facility.” Charles alleges that
certain officers failed to protect him and as a result he was injured by another inmate.
The complaint is subject to the screening requirement of 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). Pursuant
to this statute, “[a] complaint is subject to dismissal for failure to state a claim if the allegations,
taken as true, show that plaintiff is not entitled to relief.” Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. 199, 215
(2007). 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 v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 93 (2007) (per curiam) (citing Bell Atl. Corp. v.
Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007) and quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2)).
The plaintiff=s claim is asserted pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 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). In this case, the only defendant
is the “Geo Group, Inc., New Castle Correctional Facility.” The claims against GEO Group are
dismissed because it is a corporation, and a private corporation is not vicariously liable under
§1983 for its employees’ deprivations of others’ civil rights, but can only be liable if the injury
alleged is the result of a policy or practice. Johnson v. Dossey, 515 F.3d 778, 782 (7th Cir. 2008).
No such policy or practice is alleged in the complaint. To the extent the New Castle Correctional
Facility is thought to be a defendant, it is subject to dismissal because it is not a person subject to
suit; it is a facility.
The dismissal of the complaint will not in this instance result in the dismissal of the
action. Benjamin v. United States, 833 F.2d 669, 671 (7th Cir. 1987). Instead, the plaintiff shall
have through June 24, 2014, in which to file an amended complaint. The plaintiff is notified
that the amended complaint will completely replace and supersede the original complaint.
Massey v. Helman, 196 F.3d 727, 735 (7th Cir. 1999). No partial final judgment shall issue at
this time as to the claims resolved in this Entry.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
06/03/2014
Date: __________________
________________________
Hon. Tanya Walton Pratt, Judge
United States District Court
Southern District of Indiana
Distribution:
Elmer D. Charles
#985019
New Castle - CF
New Castle Correctional Facility - Inmate Mail/Parcels
1000 Van Nuys Road
NEW CASTLE, IN 47362
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?