SCOTT v. MANENTI et al
MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Chief Judge Jerome B. Simandle on 6/24/2016. (tf, n.m.)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
No. 15-7213 (JBS-AMD)
JOHN MANENTI, et al.,
SIMANDLE, Chief District Judge
On September 30, 2015, Plaintiff Joseph Scott
submitted a civil complaint alleging Defendants violated his
Eighth Amendment right to adequate medical care by, among other
things, denying him a MRI of his shoulder after experiencing
excruciating pain for nearly two years. Complaint, Docket Entry
1. The Court administratively terminated the complaint on
October 14, 2015, for failure to pay the filing fee or submit an
application to proceed in forma pauperis. Docket Entry 4.
Plaintiff paid the filing fee on October 21, 2015, and the Court
reopened the case for review.
Prior to this Court’s review of the complaint pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, Plaintiff filed two motions to amend the
complaint seeking to add a “deliberate indifference” claim as
well as a claim under the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”), 28
U.S.C. §§ 1346(b), 2671–2680. First Motion to Amend, Docket
Entry 11; Second Motion to Amend, Docket Entry 13.
The Court permitted the complaint to proceed in part
against Drs. Manenti and Morales, and the remainder of the
defendants were dismissed. The Court denied Plaintiff’s motions
to amend without prejudice as the proposed amendments did not
state valid claims. Order, Docket Entry 18.
On January 25, 2016, Plaintiff filed another motion to
amend the complaint to add a FTCA claim against all defendants,
including those the Court had dismissed in its January 7, 2016
Opinion and Order. Third Motion to Amend, Docket Entry 27.
Plaintiff attached to his motion a notice of claim
form indicating the Federal Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”) received a
claim on October 5, 2015, for $5000 due to the alleged
negligence of FCI Fairton personnel. Id. at 7-10.
The Court denied that motion as a FTCA claim may not
be brought against an individual, only the United States. April
13, 2016 Order, Docket Entry 45.
Plaintiff filed this motion to amend on May 6, 2016.
Fourth Motion to Amend, Docket Entry 47.
Rule 15(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
permits a party to amend a pleading once as a matter of course
twenty-one (21) days after serving the pleading or twenty-one
(21) days “after a responsive pleading or service of a motion
under Rule 12(b), (e), or (f), whichever is earlier.” Fed. R.
Civ. Pro. 15(a)(1)(A)-(B).
All defendants have been served; however, no
responsive pleadings have been filed.
Plaintiff seeks to add a FTCA claim against the United
States. Construing the pro se pleadings with a measure of
tolerance, Plaintiff has incorporated the facts stated in the
original complaint and has submitted his notice of tort claim
form. Therefore, the motion shall be granted as Plaintiff has
sufficiently pled a FTCA claim against the United States.
An appropriate order follows.
June 24, 2016
s/ Jerome B. Simandle
JEROME B. SIMANDLE
Chief U.S. District Judge
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?