Johnson v. Wolfgram et al

Filing 6

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis [ECF No. 3 ] is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk is directed to issue process on defendants Edwin Wolfgram, Tracey Fintel, and Peter R arindran, in accordance with the Court's waiver agreement with the State of Missouri. IT IF FURTHER ORDERED that defendants Dalton Wilson and Ashley Wafford are DISMISSED without prejudice. An Order of Partial Dismissal will be filed separately. Signed by District Judge John A. Ross on 5/12/2017. (CLO)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION

STANLEY GENE JOHNSON,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiff,
v.
EDWIN WOLFGRAM, et al.,
Defendants.

No. 4:17-CV-103 SPM

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Plaintiff seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis in this civil action under 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983. The motion is granted. Additionally, the Court finds that some of the defendants must
be dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e).
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, 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.

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

Plaintiff brings this action against several employees of the Metropolitan St. Louis
Psychiatric Center. He alleges that defendant Dr. Edwin Wolfgram ordered that he be forcibly
medicated with an anti-psychotic drug. Defendant Peter Rarindran restrained him while the
injection was administrated. Plaintiff had a bad reaction to the drug. He fell unconscious, and
his blood pressure dropped to dangerous levels. He says Wolfgam knew that the drug would
cause him to lose consciousness. Defendants called for an ambulance, and he was transported to
the hospital.
Plaintiff alleges that Dr. Wolfgram and defendant Dr. Tracey Fintel incorrectly diagnosed
him as a harm to himself, unlawfully causing him to be civilly committed. He asked defendants
Dalton Wilson and Ashley Wafford why his "score" was low, because he felt it should be higher.
Discussion

Because Plaintiffs complaint states a plausible cause of action, the Court will allow
plaintiffs forcible medication claim to proceed with regard to defendants Dr. Wolfgram and
Peter Rarindran. Additionally, the Court will allow plaintiffs claim that Drs. Wolfgram and
Fintel have unlawfully forced him to be civilly committed to go forward. Therefore, 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

2

official's own individual actions, has violated the Constitution."). Plaintiff's allegations against
defendants Wilson and Wafford fail to show their personal involvement in any violation of
plaintiff's constitutional rights. Therefore, these defendants are dismissed.
Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiffs motion to proceed in forma pauperis [ECF
No. 3] is GRANTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk is directed to issue process on defendants
Edwin Wolfgram, Tracey Fintel, and Peter Rarindran, in accordance with the Court's waiver
agreement with the State of Missouri.

IT IF FURTHER ORDERED that defendants Dalton Wilson and Ashley Wafford are
DISMISSED without prejudice.
An Order of Partial Dismissal will be filed separately.

Dated this 12th day of March, 201 7.

oss
STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3