Rudolph v. Jefferson County Jail
Filing
6
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis [Doc. #2] is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff shall pay an initial partial filing fee of $1.98 within thirty (30) days f rom the date of this Order. Plaintiff is instructed to make his remittance payable to "Clerk, United States District Court," and to include upon it: (1) his name; (2) his prison registration number; (3) the case number; and (4) that the rem ittance is for an original proceeding. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if plaintiff fails to pay the initial partial filing fee within thirty (30) days, without first showing good cause, the Court will dismiss this action without prejudice and without fur ther notice to plaintiff. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff shall file an amended complaint. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff shall file an amended complaint on or before December 21, 2012, that complies with this Memorandum and Order. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, in addition to a copy of this Order, the Clerk shall mail plaintiff a copy of the Court's form for prisoners to file a "Complaint Under the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1983."IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if pl aintiff fails to comply with this Order, the Court will dismiss this action without prejudice and without further notice to him. If the case is dismissed for non-compliance with this Order, the dismissal will not constitute a "strike" under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). (NOTE: Copy of Order and form for Complaint Under the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 mailed to Plaintiff)(LAH)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
PATRICK RUDOLPH,
Plaintiff,
v.
JEFFERSON COUNTY JAIL,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No. 4:12-CV-1780-JAR
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court upon the motion of Patrick Rudolph (registration
no. 253152), an inmate at the Missouri Eastern Correctional Center, for leave to
commence this action without payment of the required filing fee [Doc. #2]. For the
reasons stated below, the Court finds that plaintiff does not have sufficient funds to
pay the entire filing fee and will assess an initial partial filing fee of $1.98. See 28
U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). Additionally, the Court will order plaintiff to file an amended
complaint.
28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1)
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1), a prisoner bringing a civil action in forma
pauperis is required to pay the full amount of the filing fee. If the prisoner has
insufficient funds in his or her prison account to pay the entire fee, the Court must
assess and, when funds exist, collect an initial partial filing fee of 20 percent of the
greater of (1) the average monthly deposits in the prisoner’s account, or (2) the
average monthly balance in the prisoner’s account for the prior six-month period.
After payment of the initial partial filing fee, the prisoner is required to make monthly
payments of 20 percent of the preceding month’s income credited to the prisoner’s
account. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2). The agency having custody of the prisoner will
forward these monthly payments to the Clerk of Court each time the amount in the
prisoner’s account exceeds $10, until the filing fee is fully paid. Id.
Plaintiff has submitted an affidavit and a certified copy of his prison account
statement for the six-month period immediately preceding the submission of his
complaint. A review of plaintiff’s account indicates an average monthly deposit of
$9.92, and an average monthly balance of $0.00. Plaintiff has insufficient funds to
pay the entire filing fee. Accordingly, the Court will assess an initial partial filing fee
of $1.98, which is 20 percent of plaintiff’s average monthly balance.
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), the Court must dismiss a complaint filed
in forma pauperis if the action is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim upon which
relief can be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from
such relief. An action is frivolous if it "lacks an arguable basis in either law or fact."
2
Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 328 (1989). An action is malicious if it is
undertaken for the purpose of harassing the named defendants and not for the purpose
of vindicating a cognizable right. Spencer v. Rhodes, 656 F. Supp. 458, 461-63
(E.D.N.C. 1987), aff'd 826 F.2d 1059 (4th Cir. 1987). An action fails to state a claim
upon which relief can be granted if it does not plead “enough facts to state a claim to
relief that is plausible on its face.” Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544,570
(2007).
To determine whether an action fails to state a claim upon which relief can be
granted, the Court must engage in a two-step inquiry. First, the Court must identify
the allegations in the complaint that are not entitled to the assumption of truth.
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 1950-51 (2009). These include "legal conclusions"
and "[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action [that are] supported by
mere conclusory statements." Id. at 1949. Second, the Court must determine whether
the complaint states a plausible claim for relief. Id. at 1950-51. This is a "contextspecific task that requires the reviewing court to draw on its judicial experience and
common sense." Id. at 1950. The plaintiff is required to plead facts that show more
than the "mere possibility of misconduct." Id. The Court must review the factual
allegations in the complaint "to determine if they plausibly suggest an entitlement to
relief." Id. at 1951. When faced with alternative explanations for the alleged
3
misconduct, the Court may exercise its judgment in determining whether plaintiff's
conclusion is the most plausible or whether it is more likely that no misconduct
occurred. Id. at 1950, 51-52.
Moreover, in reviewing a pro se complaint under § 1915(e)(2)(B), the Court
must give the complaint the benefit of a liberal construction. Haines v. Kerner, 404
U.S. 519, 520 (1972). The Court must also weigh all factual allegations in favor of
the plaintiff, unless the facts alleged are clearly baseless. Denton v. Hernandez, 504
U.S. 25, 32 (1992).
The Complaint
Plaintiff seeks monetary relief against the Jefferson County Jail in this action
brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The allegations arise out of plaintiff’s arrest
and subsequent incarceration in June 2011.
Discussion
The Court has reviewed the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 and believes
that, although plaintiff may be able to assert a claim based upon the denial of his
constitutional rights, he has failed to set forth, in a simple, concise, and direct manner
precisely who the defendants are in this case, and the specific factual allegations
supporting each of his claims. "Liability under § 1983 requires a causal link to, and
direct responsibility for, the alleged deprivation of rights." Madewell v. Roberts, 909
4
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 where plaintiff fails to allege
defendant was personally involved in or directly responsible for incidents that injured
plaintiff); Glick v. Sargent, 696 F.2d 413, 414-15 (8th Cir. 1983) (respondeat superior
theory inapplicable in § 1983 suits). In addition, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
require litigants to formulate their pleadings in an organized and comprehensible
manner. Even pro se litigants are obligated to abide by the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure. See U.S. v. Wilkes, 20 F.3d 651, 653 (5th Cir. 1994); Boswell v.
Honorable Governor of Texas, 138 F.Supp.2d 782, 785 (N.D. Texas 2000);
Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2)(complaint should contain “short and plain statement” of claims);
Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(e)(2)(each claim shall be “simple, concise, and direct”); Fed.R.Civ.P.
10(b)(parties are to separate their claims within their pleadings “the contents of which
shall be limited as far as practicable to a single set of circumstances”). Although the
Court is to give the complaint the benefit of a liberal construction, the Court will not
create facts or claims that have not been alleged. Plaintiff is required, to the best of
his ability, to set out in a simple, concise, and direct manner, not only his
constitutional claims, but also the facts supporting these claims as to each named
defendant.
Because plaintiff is proceeding pro se, the Court will allow him time to file an
5
amended complaint in accordance with this Memorandum and Order. In the amended
complaint, plaintiff shall complete in its entirety the court-provided form for filing a
complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Specifically, in the "Caption" of the form
complaint, plaintiff shall set forth the name of each defendant he wishes to sue in this
action; and in the "Statement of Claim," plaintiff shall start by typing the first
defendant’s name, and under that name, he shall set forth in separate numbered
paragraphs the allegations supporting his claim(s) as to that particular defendant, as
well as the right(s) that he claims that particular defendant violated. Plaintiff shall
proceed in this manner with each of the named defendants, separately setting forth
each individual name and under that name, in numbered paragraphs, the allegations
specific to that particular defendant and the right(s) that he claims that particular
defendant violated. The amended complaint must contain short and plain statements
showing that plaintiff is entitled to relief, the allegations must be simple, concise, and
direct, and the numbered paragraphs must each be limited to a single set of
circumstances. If plaintiff needs more space, he may attach additional sheets of paper
to the amended complaint and identify them as part of the "Caption" or "Statement of
Claim." Plaintiff shall sign the amended complaint.
Because the Court is allowing plaintiff to amend his complaint, it will take no
action as to the named defendant at this time. Plaintiff is advised that his amended
6
complaint will replace his original complaint and will be the only complaint this Court
reviews. The Court will not consider any claims that are not included in the amended
complaint, even if they were asserted in the earlier complaint. Plaintiff’s failure to
comply with this Order will result in the dismissal of this action, without prejudice
and without further notice to him.
In accordance with the foregoing,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed in
forma pauperis [Doc. #2] is GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff shall pay an initial partial filing
fee of $1.98 within thirty (30) days from the date of this Order. Plaintiff is instructed
to make his remittance payable to "Clerk, United States District Court," and to include
upon it: (1) his name; (2) his prison registration number; (3) the case number; and (4)
that the remittance is for an original proceeding.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if plaintiff fails to pay the initial partial
filing fee within thirty (30) days, without first showing good cause, the Court will
dismiss this action without prejudice and without further notice to plaintiff.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff shall file an amended complaint
on or before December 21, 2012, that complies with this Memorandum and Order.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, in addition to a copy of this Order, the
7
Clerk shall mail plaintiff a copy of the Court’s form for prisoners to file a "Complaint
Under the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1983."
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if plaintiff fails to comply with this Order,
the Court will dismiss this action without prejudice and without further notice to him.
If the case is dismissed for non-compliance with this Order, the dismissal will not
constitute a “strike” under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
Dated this 21st day of November, 2012.
_______________________________
JOHN A. ROSS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
8
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?