Jamerson v. Williams et al

Filing 18

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER : IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for leave to file an amended complaint [ECF No. 16 ] is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk is directed to serve defendants George Lombardi (Missouri Department of Co rrections) and Julie Phipps (Corizon, Inc.) with process. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff's claims against Corizon, Inc., are DISMISSED- without prejudice. An Order of Partial Dismissal will be filed separately.. Signed by District Judge John A. Ross on 8/19/16. (KKS)

Also UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
MICHAEL C. JAMERSON,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiff,

v.
JOHN WILLIAMS, et al.,
Defendants.

No. 4:16-CV-760 JAR

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on review of plaintiffs. motion for leave to file an
amended complaint and on review of plaintiffs amended complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e).
Having reviewed the amended complaint, the Court finds that the motion for leave to amend
should be granted. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a). Additionally, the Court finds that the amended
complaint states a plausible claim for relief with regard to defendants John Williams, Julie
Phipps, and George Lombardi.

Standard of Review
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), the Court is required to dismiss a complaint filed in forma
pauperis if it is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
To state a claim for relief under § 1983, a complaint must plead more than "legal conclusions"
and "[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action [that are] supported by mere
conclusory statements." Ashcroft

v.

Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009).

A plaintiff must

demonstrate a plausible claim for relief, which is more than a "mere possibility of misconduct."
Id. at 679. "A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows

the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct

alleged;" Id. at 678. Determining whether a complaint states a plausible claim for relief is a
context-specific task that requires the reviewing court to draw on its judicial experience and
common sense. Id. at 679.
The Complaint

Plaintiff alleges that he has Hepatitis C and that defendant Dr. John Williams refuses to
provide him with treatment.

He further alleges that defendant Julie Phipps is Williams's

supervisor and has directed him not to treat plaintiffs disease. He says he is suffering from
irreparable liver damage as a result. He claims that defendant George Lombardi, as the Director
of the Missouri Department of Corrections, has directed Corizon officials not to treat inmates
with Hepatitis C. He also seeks to hold Corizon liable.
Plaintiff requests that the Court certify this case as a class action on behalf of similarly
situated inmates at the Missouri Eastern Correctional Center.
Discussion

To state a claim for medical mistreatment, plaintiff must plead facts sufficient to indicate
a deliberate indifference to serious medical needs. Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 106 (1976);

Camberos v. Branstad, 73 F.3d 174, 175 (8th Cir. 1995). Allegations of mere negligence in
giving or failing to supply medical treatment will not suffice. Estelle, 429 U.S. at 106. In order
to show deliberate indifference, plaintiff must allege that he suffered objectively serious medical
needs and that defendants actually knew of but deliberately disregarded those needs. Dulany v.

Carnahan, 132 F.3d 1234, 1239 (8th Cir. 1997). In order to state a claim against Corizon,
plaintiff must allege that there was a policy, custom or official action that caused an actionable
injury. Sanders v. Sears Roebuck & Co., 984 F.2d 972, 95-76 (8th Cir. 1993).

2

The Court finds that the claims against Williams, Phipps, and Lombardi for
unconstitutional medical mistreatment should not be dismissed at this time. Therefore, the Court
will order the Clerk to serve Phipps and Lombardi with process.
There are no allegations that a policy or custom of Corizon caused plaintiffs injuries. As
a result, Corizon must be dismissed.
Plaintiffs request to certify a class action is denied.

Under Rule 23(a)(4), a class

representative must "fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class." Additionally, a pro
se litigant may bring his own claims to federal court without counsel, but not the claims of
others. See 28 U.S.C. § 1654; 7A Wright, Miller & Kane, Federal Practice and Procedure: Civil
3d § 1769.l ("class representatives cannot appear prose.").
Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiffs motion for leave to file an amended
complaint [ECF No. 16] is GRANTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk is directed to serve defendants George
Lombardi (Missouri Department of Corrections) and Julie Phipps (Corizon, Inc.) with process.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiffs claims against Corizon, Inc., are
DISMISSED- without prejudice.
An Order of Partial Dismissal will be filed separately.
Dated this 18th day of August, 2016.

~.ROSS

TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3