Ford v. Richwood Correctional Center et al

Filing 22

MEMORANDUM ORDER: Directing plaintiff to amend complaint/petition. Pro Se Response due by 10/25/2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge Joseph H L Perez-Montes on 9/25/2017. (crt,Williams, L)

a
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
ALEXANDRIA DIVISION
ROMAN FORD (#156841),
Plaintiff

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:17-CV-194; SEC. P

VERSUS

CHIEF JUDGE DRELL

WARDEN, ET AL.,
Defendants

MAGISTRATE JUDGE PEREZ-MONTES

MEMORANDUM ORDER
Before the Court is the civil rights complaint (42 U.S.C. § 1983) of pro se
Plaintiff Roman Ford (#156841). Ford was granted leave to proceed in forma

pauperis. (Doc. 13). At the time of filing, he was housed at LaSalle Correctional
Center in Olla, Louisiana. Ford was transferred to Caldwell Correctional Center in
Grayson, and then to Jackson Parish Correctional Center in Jonesborro. Ford is now
incarcerated at Richwood Correctional Center in Monroe. Ford complains that his
constitutional rights were violated when he was a pre-trial detainee at Richwood
Correctional Center (“RCC”).
I.

Background
Ford alleges that, while a pre-trial detainee at RCC, he had interactions with

convicted inmates in the custody of the Department of Corrections (“DOC”). Ford
alleges that, on June 13, 2013, he “ended up in a physical altercation with a DOC
inmate.” (Doc. 1, p. 3). Ford claims that Defendants are liable because he should not
have been “placed with the inmates at Richwood.” (Doc. 1, p. 3).

II.

Instructions to Amend
Pursuant to Rule 8(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a pleading

must contain a “short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is
entitled to relief.” The Rule 8 pleading standard does not require “detailed factual
allegations,” but demands more than an “unadorned, the-defendant-unlawfullyharmed-me accusation.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (citations
omitted). A pleading that offers “labels and conclusions” or “a formulaic recitation of
the elements of a cause of action will not do.” Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550
U.S. 544, 555 (2007).
Ford shall amend his complaint and provide a description of what actually
occurred with regard to the physical altercation, and what each named defendant did
to violate Ford’s constitutional rights. Ford should state whether he received a
disciplinary conviction as a result of the altercation and what, if any, sanctions were
imposed.
III.

Conclusion
IT IS ORDERED that Ford amend his complaint within thirty (30) days of the

filing of this Order to provide the information outlined above, or dismissal will be
recommended under Rule 41(b) or 16(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Ford’s motion to order the Iberia Parish Jail
and DOC to provide copies of Ford’s ARPs (Doc. 17) is DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Ford’s motion to appoint counsel (Doc. 21) is
DENIED at this time, as no “exceptional circumstances” have been presented

2

necessitating such appointment. See Archie v. Christian, 812 F.2d 250, 253 (5th Cir.
1987).
25th
THUS DONE AND SIGNED in chambers in Alexandria, Louisiana, this ____
day of September, 2017.

______________________________
Joseph H.L. Perez-Montes
United States Magistrate Judge

3