REDMOND v. INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION et al
ENTRY Discussing Allegations of "Imminent Danger" And Directing Further Proceedings. The Court will fully consider the plaintiff's claim for injunctive relief. All other claims and defendant Indiana Department of Correction are dis missed. If the plaintiff wants to proceed on his claim that the conditions he experienced in the Secured Housing Unit were unconstitutional, he must do so in a new civil action after paying the filing fee. The clerk is designated pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3) to issue process to defendant Superintendent Wendy Knight and Final Reviewing Authority L.A. Van Natta in the manner specified by Rule 4(d). (See Order.) Signed by Judge Larry J. McKinney on 2/23/2017. Copy sent to Plaintiff via US Mail.(LDH)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
JOHN H. REDMOND, IV,
INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTION Corporation, WENDY
KNIGHT Superintendent, L.A. VAN NATTA
Final Reviewing Authority,
Case No. 1:17-cv-00109-LJM-MPB
Entry Discussing Allegations of “Imminent Danger”
And Directing Further Proceedings
The plaintiff has “struck out” under 28 U.S.C. § 1915, such that this action may not proceed
without the prepayment of the filing fee unless the plaintiff faces circumstances that place him
“under imminent danger of serious physical injury.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g); Redmond v. Upchurch,
et al., 1:16-cv-0257-JMS-DML (S.D. Ind. dismissed Feb. 19, 2016). The plaintiff was given the
opportunity to identify any such circumstances present in this case and to explain what injunctive
relief, if any, he seeks.
In response, the plaintiff states that he has been continuously threatened by offender Jerome
Johnson with physical violence and that he needs an order separating him from Jerome Johnson.
The plaintiff also contends that he needs an order separating him from all individuals who pose an
imminent threat of serious physical injury and that he is at risk as long as the Secured Housing
Unit is in operation. He states that he expects to be placed in the Secured Housing Unit in the
future and that he does not want “serious injury to occur again.” In terms of relief, the plaintiff
wants to be transferred from the facility and separated from “the offenders.” He’d also like “a
verbal reprimand” (presumably against other actors), a public apology and money damages.
The claim that the plaintiff faces imminent danger of serious physical injury unless he is
separated from Jerome Johnson shall proceed in this action. This claim is adequately alleged
against defendants Superintendent Wendy Knight and Final Reviewing Authority L.A. Van Natta.
The complaint alleges:
Dkt. 1 at 7.
The claim in this action is limited to injunctive relief. Prison officials have a duty to protect
inmates from violent assaults by other inmates and they incur liability for the breach of that duty
when they were “aware of a substantial risk of serious injury to [an inmate] but nevertheless failed
to take appropriate steps to protect him from a known danger.” Guzman v. Sheahan, 495 F.3d 852,
857 (7th Cir. 2007) (quoting Butera v. Cottey, 285 F.3d 601, 605 (7th Cir. 2002)); see also Santiago
v. Walls, 599 F.3d 749, 758–59 (7th Cir. 2010). As stated above, the plaintiff has alleged such a
claim. However, damages for “a deliberate indifference claim cannot be predicated merely on
knowledge of general risks of violence,” Weiss v. Cooley, 230 F.3d 1027, 1032 (7th Cir. 2000), or
fear of an unrealized attack, see Babcock v. White, 102 F.3d 267, 270 (7th Cir. 1996). Thus, no
money damages are available in this case, because the plaintiff was not physically injured by
Jerome Johnson. The Court will, however, fully consider the plaintiff’s claim for injunctive relief.
All other claims and defendant Indiana Department of Correction are dismissed. If the
plaintiff wants to proceed on his claim that the conditions he experienced in the Secured Housing
Unit were unconstitutional, he must do so in a new civil action after paying the filing fee.
The clerk is designated pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3) to issue process to defendant
Superintendent Wendy Knight and Final Reviewing Authority L.A. Van Natta in the manner
specified by Rule 4(d). Process shall consist of the complaint [dkt. 1], Entry of January 25, 2017
[dkt. 9], applicable forms (Notice of Lawsuit and Request for Waiver of Service of Summons and
Waiver of Service of Summons), and this Entry.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
LARRY J. McKINNEY, JUDGE
United States District Court
Southern District of Indiana
JOHN H. REDMOND, IV
PENDLETON - CIF
CORRECTIONAL INDUSTRIAL FACILITY
5124 West Reformatory Road
PENDLETON, IN 46064
Electronic Service to Indiana Department of Correction Employees:
Wendy Knight, Superintendent
L.A. Van Natta, Final Reviewing Authority
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?