Rogers v. Brouk et al

Filing 4

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER re: 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis under 42:1983 (prisoner) filed by Plaintiff Corey Jemell Rogers; motion is GRANTED. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiffs motion to proceed in forma pauperis [ECF No.2] is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the plaintiff must pay an initial filing fee of $1.00 within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order. Plaintiff is instructed to make his remittance payable to "Clerk, United States District Court,&quo t; 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 the Clerk is directed to serve process on defendants Steven Brouk, John Layton, and Donald Hale pursuant to the Court's agreement with the Missouri Department of Corrections. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants John Schneedle, Cindy Griffith, and Alan Earls are DISMISSED without prejudice. An Order of Partial Dismissal will be filed separately. (Initial Partial Filing Fee due by 9/1/2016.) Signed by District Judge Stephen N. Limbaugh, Jr on 8/2/16. (CSG)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI

EASTERN DIVISION
COREY JEMELL ROGERS,
Plaintiff,
v.

STEVEN BROUK, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

FILED
AUG 02 2016
U. S. DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MO
CAPE GIRARDEAU

No. 4:16-CV-I088 SNLJ

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff, a prisoner, seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis in this civil action under 42
U.S.C. § 1983. Having reviewed plaintiffs financial information, the Court assesses a partial
initial filing fee of $1.00, which is twenty percent of his average monthly deposit. See 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(b).
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 defendants Steven Brouk, John Layton, and Donald Hale assaulted
him while he was in handcuffs.

He claims that defendant Alan Earls failed to properly

investigate his grievance, that defendant Cindy Griffith failed to properly discipline Brouk,
Layton, and Hale, and that defendant John Schneedle gave him a false conduct violation.
Discussion

The Court finds that plaintiff has stated a plausible claim against defendants Brouk,
Layton, and Hale. As a result, the Court will order the Clerk to serve these defendants with
process.
"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 Ashcroft
v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 676 (2009) ("Because vicarious liability is inapplicable to Bivens and
§ 1983 suits, a plaintiff must plead that each Government-official defendant, through the

official's own individual actions, has violated the Constitution."); Camberos v. Branstad, 73
F.3d 174, 176 (8th Cir. 1995) ("a general responsibility for supervising the operations of a prison
is insufficient to establish the personal involvement required to support liability."); George v.
Smith, 507 F. 3d 605, 609 (7th Cir. 2007) ("Only persons who cause or participate in the

[constitutional] violations are responsible.

Ruling against a prisoner on an administrative

complaint does not cause or contribute to the violation."); Glick v. Sargent, 696 F.2d 413, 414
(8th Cir. 1983) (per curiam) (allegations regarding false conduct violation failed to state a claim).

2

Plaintiff has not pled facts showing that defendants Earls, Griffith, or Schneedle were directly
involved in the assault. Therefore, the complaint fails to state a claim against these defendants.
Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiffs motion to proceed in forma pauperis [ECF
No.2] is GRANTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the plaintiff must pay an initial filing fee of $1.00
within thirty (30) days of 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. I

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk is directed to serve process on defendants
Steven Brouk, John Layton, and Donald Hale pursuant to the Court's agreement with the
Missouri Department of Corrections.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants John Schneedle, Cindy Griffith, and Alan
Earls are DISMISSED without prejudice.
An Order of Partial Dismissal will be filed separately.
Dated this

U

day of August, 2016.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

1 Prisoners must pay the full amount of the $350 filing fee.
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. The agency having custody of the prisoner will deduct the payments and forward them to the
Court each time the amount in the account exceeds $10. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2).

3