Mosley v. Wallace et al

Filing 23

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER re: 20 MOTION to Dismiss Party George Lombardi, Paula Reed, Bill Stange, and Ian Wallace filed by Defendant Bill Stange, Defendant Paula Reed, Defendant George Lombardi, Defendant Ian Wallace. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant George Lombardi, Paula Reed, Bill Strange, and Ian Wallace's motion to dismiss is DENIED. [ECF No. 20] Signed by District Judge Ronnie L. White on 12/18/17. (CSG)

UNITED ST ATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
SOUTHEASTERN DIVISION
DEVIN MOSLEY,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiff,
V.

IAN WALLACE, et al.
Defendants.

No. 1:16-CV-297 RLW

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on defendants George Lombardi, Paula Reed, Bill
Strange, and Ian Wallace's motion to dismiss. Plaintiff has not responded to the motion, and the
time for doing so has passed. For the following reasons, the Court will deny defendants' motion.

Background
On December 27, 2016, plaintiff, an inmate at Southeast Correctional Center ("SECC"),
filed his complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging defendants were deliberately indifferent to
his serious medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment. Plaintiff alleges that on April
2, 2014, another inmate threw a hot, liquid substance onto plaintiffs face, neck, chest, and arms,
causing first and second degree bums.

He alleges that each of the defendants had direct

knowledge of the injuries but refused to provide him with any medical treatment. He suffered
permanent injuries, including disfigurement and vision loss.
After initial review under 28 U.S.C. § 1915, the Court issued process on all defendants.
Defendants Eddie Hartline, David Helman, Tiffany Johnson, Brandi Juden, Mina Massey, Donna
Spaven, and Greeneen Wilhite (the "medical defendants") have filed an answer. Defendants
George Lombardi, the former director of Missouri Department of Corrections ("MDOC"); Ian
Wallace, the former Warden of SECC; Paula Reed, the Assistant Warden of SECC, and Bill

Strange, the Deputy Warden of SECC (the "prison official defendants") have filed the instant
motion to dismiss plaintiffs claims.

Legal Standard
The purpose of a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure is to test the legal sufficiency of the complaint. The factual allegations of a complaint
are assumed true and construed in favor of the plaintiff, "even if it strikes a savvy judge that
actual proof of those facts is improbable." Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 556
(2007) (citing Swierkiewicz v. Sorema NA., 534 U.S. 506, 508 n.1 (2002)); Neitzke v. Williams,
490 U.S. 319, 327 (1989) ("Rule 12(b)(6) does not countenance ... dismissals based on a judge's
disbelief of a complaint's factual allegations").

The issue is not whether the plaintiff will

ultimately prevail, but whether the plaintiff is entitled to present evidence in support of his claim.

Id. A viable complaint must include "enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on
its face." Bell Atlantic Corp., 550 U.S. at 570. See also id. at 563 ("no set of facts" language in

Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-46 (1957), "has earned its retirement.") "Factual allegations
must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level." Id. at 555.

Discussion
The prison official defendants move to dismiss plaintiffs complaint, stating they did not
personally violate plaintiffs constitutional rights and therefore cannot be held liable under §
1983.

They state that other than alleging they failed to supervise or correct the medical

defendants, whom plaintiff alleges provided inadequate medical care, plaintiff has made no other
allegations against the prison official defendants.
"Liability under § 1983 requires a causal link to, and direct responsibility for, the alleged
deprivation of rights." Madewell v. Roberts, 909 F.2d 1203, 1208 (8th Cir. 1990); see also

Martin v. Sargent, 780 F.2d 1334, 1338 (8th Cir. 1985) (claim not cognizable under § 1983

-2-

where plaintiff fails to allege defendant was personally involved in or directly responsible for
incidents that injured plaintiff); Boyd v. Knox, 47 F.3d 966, 968 (8th Cir. 1995) (respondeat
superior theory inapplicable in § 1983 suits). Supervisors cannot be held vicariously liable under
§ 1983 for the actions of a subordinate. See Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 675-76 (2009). To
state a claim, the plaintiff must plead that the supervising official, through his own individual
actions, has violated the Constitution. Id.
The Court disagrees with the prison official defendants, and will deny their motion to
dismiss.

Plaintiff alleges the prison official defendants were immediately notified about the

incident, personally observed the seriousness of plaintiffs injuries, and did not authorize any
immediate medical treatment or transfer plaintiff to the infirmary. Instead, the prison officials
allowed plaintiff to be taken to a restrictive housing unit where he remained for three days
without appropriate medical care. Viewing these facts in the light most favorable to plaintiff, the
Court finds plaintiff has alleged a plausible claim of Eighth Amendment violations against the
prison official defendants. Plaintiff alleges these defendants bore personal responsibility for his
lack of medical treatment.
Additionally, the Court denies defendants' motion to dismiss on qualified immunity
grounds. At this stage in the proceeding, plaintiff has alleged a violation of a constitutional right
that was clearly established such that a reasonable official would have known that his actions
were unlawful. Because plaintiff has alleged defendants Lombardi, Reed, Strange, and Wallace
were personally involved in his alleged constitutional violations, and because these Eighth
Amendment violations were clearly established such that a reasonable official would have
known his actions were unlawful, the Court will deny defendants' motion to dismiss.
Accordingly,

-3-

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant George Lombardi, Paula Reed, Bill Strange,
and Ian Wallace's motion to dismiss is DENIED. [ECF No. 20]

ROIELWHITE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

-4-