Gerald v. Goad et al

Filing 6

MEMORANDUM ORDER directing plaintiff to amend his complaint. Pro Se Response due by 4/7/2025. Signed by Magistrate Judge Joseph H L Perez-Montes on 3/6/2025. (crt,Devillier, W)

a
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
ALEXANDRIA DIVISION
KEITH J GERALD #591112,
Plaintiff

CIVIL DOCKET NO. 1:24-CV-01587
SEC P

VERSUS

JUDGE DRELL

CHRISTOPHER GOAD ET AL,
Defendants

MAGISTRATE JUDGE PEREZ-MONTES

MEMORANDUM ORDER
Before the Court is a civil rights Complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 filed by pro
se Plaintiff Keith Gerald (“Gerald”), an inmate at the Concordia Parish Correctional
Center (“CPCC”). Gerald alleges the violation of his constitutional rights by Assistant
Warden Christopher Goad (“Goad”) and Sheriff Hendrix.
Because Gerald should be an afforded an opportunity to provide additional
allegations, he may AMEND the Complaint.
I.

Background
Gerald alleges that on June 6, 2024, Warden Goad pulled him out of a chair,

threatened him, rammed his head against the wall, and threw him down the hall.
ECF No. 1 at 5-6. Gerald alleges that he filed an administrative remedy at each level
but received no responses. ECF No. 1 at 2.
Gerald asserts that Warden Goad left handprints around his neck, which were
noticed by other inmates.

He claims that he should have received a medical

evaluation after the incident. Id.
1

II.

Law and Analysis
Not “every malevolent touch by a prison guard gives rise to a federal cause of

action.”

Hudson v. McMillian, 503 U.S. 1 (1992).

“The Eighth Amendment’s

prohibition of ‘cruel and unusual’ punishments necessarily excludes from
constitutional recognition de minimis uses of physical force, provided that the use of
force is not of a sort repugnant to the conscience of mankind.” Wilkins v. Gaddy, 559
U.S. 34, 37–38 (2010) (citing Hudson, 503 U.S. at 9–10). An inmate who complains
of a “ ‘push or shove’ ” that causes no discernible injury almost certainly fails to state
a valid excessive force claim. Hudson, 503 U.S. at 9.
Additionally, § 1997e(e) provides that “[n]o federal civil action may be brought
by a prisoner confined to a jail, prison, or other correctional facility, for mental or
emotional injury suffered while in custody without a prior showing of physical injury.”
42 U.S.C. § 1997e(e).
Although Gerald believes he should have been transported to the hospital after
the incident, he does not allege to have suffered any injuries. Nor does he allege that
he ever requested medical care.
Ordinarily, “a pro se litigant should be afforded an opportunity to amend his
complaint before it is dismissed.” Brewster v. Dretke, 587 F.3d 764, 767-68 (5th Cir.
2009). Therefore, Gerald may amend his Complaint to explain what, if any, injury
he suffered from the alleged use of force and to state whether he requested medical
treatment from staff at CPCC following the incident. If he did request medical care,

2

he should state the dates on which each request was made; to whom the request was
made; whether the request was verbal or written; and whether he was ever examined.
III.

Conclusion
To allow Gerald an opportunity to provide additional factual allegations, IT IS

ORDERED that he be provided 30 days from the date of this Order within which to
AMEND the Complaint.
SIGNED on Thursday, March 6, 2025.
_______________________________________
JOSEPH H.L. PEREZ-MONTES
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

3