Woodson v. City of St. Louis et al

Filing 5

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER :IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiffs motion to proceed m forma pauperis(Docket No. 3 ) is GRANTED.IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the plaintiff must pay an initial filing fee of $7.35within 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. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED without prejudice. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiffs Motion to Appoint Counsel (Docket No. 2) is DENIED as moot.. Signed by District Judge John A. Ross on 10/21/16. (KKS)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DiSTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
CEDRIC WOODSON,
Plaintiff,

v.
CITY OF ST. LOUIS, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

~o.

4:16CV1624 JAR

MEMORANDUM AND ORIDER
This matter is before the Court upon the motion of plaintiff Cedric Woodson for leave to
proceed in forma pauperis in this civil action filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Docket No. 3). The
Court will grant the motion, and assess a partial initial filing fee of $7.35, which is twenty
percent of his average monthly balance. See 28 U.S.C; § 1915(b). The Court will also dismiss
this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), and deny as moot plaintiffs Motion to Appoint
Counsel. (Docket No. 2).
28 u.s.c. § 1915(b)(1)
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(l), 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

a~erage

monthly deposits in the

prisoner's account, or (2) the average monthly balance in the prisoner's account for the prior sixmonth 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
$10.00, until the filing fee is fully paid. Id
Along with the instant motion and affidavit in support, plaintiff submitted a notarized
"Resident Funds Inquiry" form showing that his institution account had an average monthly
balance of $3 6. 77. Based upon this information, the Court will require plaintiff to pay an initial
partial filing fee of $7.35, which is twenty percent of his average monthly balance. 28 U.S.C. §
1915(b)(l).
28 lJ.S.C. § 1915(e)
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, 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).

The complaint 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.
When reviewing a complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), the Court accepts the well-pied
facts as true, and liberally construes the allegations.

2

Tine Compfain11:
Plaintiff, an inmate at the St. Louis City Justice Center, brings this action pursuant to 42
U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff name~ as defendants the City of St. Louis, OSHA, the State of Missouri,
Mayor Francis G. Slay, the City of St. Louis Corrections, and Corizon, Inc. Plaintiff alleges that
that the St. Louis City Justice Center is overcrowded, the building is condemned and infested
with vermin and mold, there are inadequate fire and safety precautions, the kitchen has been shut
down by city health officials, and inmate mail is mishandled. Plaintiff claims that other inmates
have been affected by the conditions, but does not allege to have been personally injured in any
way.
Discussion
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. Consequently, this action is legally frivolous.
In addition, to state a claim against the Corrections Division of St. Louis City or Corizon,
a plaintiff must allege that a policy or custom of the government entity is responsible for the
alleged constitutional violation.

Monell v. Dep ''t of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658, 690-91

(1978). Plaintiff has not made any such allegations. As a result, these defendants must be
dismissed.
Plaintiffs claim against the City of St. Louis is legally frivolous because it cannot be
sued. Ketchum v. City of West Memphis, Ark., 974 F.2d 81, 82 (8th Cir. 1992) (departments or
subdivisions of local government are "not juridical entities suable as such."). Plaintiffs claim
against the State of Missouri is barred by the Eleventh Amendment to the Constitution of the
United States. See Will v. Michigan Dept. of State Police, 491 U.S. 58, 63 (1989) (the State of
Missouri is absolutely immune from liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983).

3

The only method for suing a federal agency, such as the United States Department of
Labor, which oversees OSHA, is to file a claim under the Federal Torts Claim Act. See 28
U.S.C. § 2679(b)(l). Therefore, plaintiffs claim against OSHA is legally frivolous.
"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 Iqbal, 556
U.S. at 676 ("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.").

There are no allegations that Mayor

Francis G. Slay was directly responsible for an injury to plaintiff. He is sued under the theory of
respondeat superior. As a result, plaintiff's allegations against him fail to state a claim upon
which relief can be granted.
Accordingly,
IT IS HERJEBY O.IRDERED that plaintiffs motion to proceed m forma pauperis
(Docket No. 3) is GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the plaintiff must pay an initial filing fee of $7.35
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.
IT IS FURTHER ORIDJERED that this action is DISM][SSED without prejudice.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiffs Motion to Appoint Counsel (Docket No.
2) is DENIED as moot.
An Order of Dismissal will be filed separately.
Dated this 21st day of October, 2016.

.ROSS
ED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

5