ODUMS v. SOUTH WOODS STATE PRISON et al

Filing 3

OPINION. Signed by Judge Renee Marie Bumb on 2/22/2017. (rtm, )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
CAMDEN VICINAGE
ELONZIO ODUMS,

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

Plaintiff,
v.

SOUTH WOODS STATE PRISON,
et al.,
Defendants.

Civil Action No. 16-9145(RMB)

OPINION

BUMB, District Judge:
Plaintiff Elonzio Odums, a prisoner confined at South Woods
State

Prison

in

Bridgeton,

New

Jersey,

seeks

to

bring

action in forma pauperis, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

this
He

alleges violations of his constitutional rights by the prison,
its

administrator

corrections officers.

and

assistant

superintendent,

and

two

Based on his affidavit of indigence and

the absence of three qualifying dismissals within 28 U.S.C. §
1915(g), the Court will grant Plaintiff's application to proceed
in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), and order the
Clerk of the Court to file the Complaint.
At this time, the Court must review the Complaint pursuant
to to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) and § 1915A to determine whether
it should be dismissed as frivolous or malicious, for failure to
1 

state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or because it
seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such
relief.
I. BACKGROUND
Plaintiff alleged the following in his Complaint.1

On June

21, 2016, Plaintiff saw a doctor at South Woods State Prison,
and the doctor scraped the bottom of Plaintiff’s foot.
ECF No. 1, ¶13.)

(Compl.,

The doctor advised Plaintiff not to walk or

stand on his foot for a few days.

(Id., ¶14.) Plaintiff is

confined in a wheelchair because his other leg was amputated at
the knee.

(Id., ¶¶14, 17.)

As Plaintiff was returning to the minimum unit that day, he
was told to get into the metal detector chair (“boss chair”).
(Id., ¶16.)

Plaintiff told Officer Donaghy that he could not

stand on his foot because Dr. Farrow had just scraped it.

(Id.,

1

On September 26, 2016, Plaintiff filed a civil rights action in
this Court alleging certain facts identical to those raised in
this action filed on December 9, 2016. See Odums v. New Jersey
Department of Corrections, et al., Civil Action No. 16-5950(RBK)
(D.N.J. Sept. 26, 2016) (ECF No. 1, ¶¶ 22-30.) It appears that
Plaintiff may have mistakenly included a page of his prior
Complaint from Civil Action No. 16-5950 as the third page in the
present Complaint.
There are two sets of paragraphs 22-32 in
the present Complaint.
The Court will strike the first
paragraphs 2-32 (ECF No. 1 at 3) because they are duplicative of
the allegations in Civil Action No. 16-5950. Plaintiff may file
an amended complaint if the allegations on this page are in fact
new allegations relating to a different incident than the one
described in Civil Action No. 16-5950.
2 

¶17.)

When Donaghy insisted that Plaintiff stand up, Plaintiff

asked to see a Sergeant.

(Id., ¶18.)

Sergeant Vernell told Plaintiff to get in the boss chair or
go to lockup.
he

could

(Id.)

(Id., ¶19.)

get

two

Vernell

Plaintiff asked Sergeant Vernell if

inmates

cleared

to

the

lift
room

Plaintiff
so

there

into

would

the

chair.

not

be

witnesses and told Plaintiff to get in the boss chair.
¶¶19-20.)

Plaintiff tried to stand but he fell.

any

(Id.,

(Id., ¶20.)

Plaintiff asked for assistance but Vernell told him to get up on
his own.

(Id., ¶21.)

Plaintiff was then placed in lockup for

five days, and given a suspended sentence.

(ECF No. 1 at 4,

¶22.)

For relief, Plaintiff seeks one million dollars each from

South

Woods

State

Prison,

Officer

Donaghy,

Sergeant

Vernell,

Willie Bonds, the Administrator of South Woods State Prison, and
C.

Cline,

Prison.

the

Assistant

Superintendent

of

South

Woods

State

(ECF No. 1 at 4, ¶27.)

II. STANDARDS FOR A SUA SPONTE DISMISSAL
A pleading must contain a “short and plain statement of the
claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.”
Civ. P. 8(a)(2).

Fed. R.

“To survive a motion to dismiss, a complaint

must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to
‘state

a

Ashcroft

claim
v.

to

Iqbal,

relief
556

that

U.S.

is

662,

plausible
678

(2009)

on

its

(quoting

Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)).
3 

face.’”
Bell

“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.

(quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 556.)
“[A]

court

must

accept

contained in a complaint.”
conclusions

as

true.

as

Id.

Id.

true

all

of

the

allegations

A court need not accept legal

Legal

conclusions,

together

with

threadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, do not
suffice to state a claim.

Id.

Thus, “a court considering a

motion to dismiss can choose to begin by identifying pleadings
that,

because

they

are

no

more

than

conclusions,

entitled to the assumption of truth.” Id. at 679.

are

not

“While legal

conclusions can provide the framework of a complaint, they must
be supported by factual allegations.” Id.

If a complaint can be

remedied by an amendment, a district court may not dismiss the
complaint

with

prejudice,

but

must

permit

the

amendment.

Grayson v. Mayview State Hospital, 293 F.3d 103, 108 (3d Cir.
2002).

A court must liberally construe a pro se complaint.

Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007).
III. SECTION 1983 CLAIMS
A plaintiff may have a cause of action under 42 U.S.C. §
1983

for

certain

violations

of

his

Section 1983 provides in relevant part:

4 

constitutional

rights.

Every person who, under color of any
statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or
usage, of any State or Territory ...
subjects, or causes to be subjected, any
citizen of the United States or other person
within the jurisdiction thereof to the
deprivation of any rights, privileges, or
immunities secured by the Constitution and
laws, shall be liable to the party injured
in an action at law, suit in equity, or
other proper proceeding for redress ....

Thus, to state a claim for relief under § 1983, a plaintiff
must allege, first, the violation of a right secured by the
Constitution or laws of the United States and, second, that the
alleged deprivation was committed or caused by a person acting
under color of state law.

West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48

(1988); Piecknick v. Pennsylvania, 36 F.3d 1250, 1255–56 (3d
Cir. 1994).
A.

South Woods State Prison

A prison is not a “person” who may be sued under 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983.
(citing

Fischer v. Cahill, 474 F.2d 991, 992 (3d Cir. 1973)
United

States

ex

rel.

Gittlemacker

v.

County

of

Philadelphia, 413 F.2d 84 (3d Cir. 1969), cert. denied, 396 U.S.
1046 (1970)); Lenhart v. Pennsylvania, 528 F. App’x 111, 114 (3d
Cir.

2013)

dismiss

the

(citations
claims

omitted).

against

South

prejudice.
B.

Willie Bonds and C. Cline

5 

Therefore,
Woods

the

State

Court

will

Prison

with

The

only

mention

of

Willie

Bonds

and

C.

Cline

in

the

Complaint is that they are, respectively, the Administrator at
South

Woods

State

Prison,

and

the

Assistant

Superintendent.

Plaintiff has not alleged any personal involvement of Bonds or
Cline in the misconduct he alleges in the Complaint.
Assuming

Plaintiff

intended

to

hold

Bonds

and

Cline

responsible for the misconduct of their employees, there is no
respondeat superior liability under § 1983.

See Iqbal, 556 U.S.

662, 676 (2009) (“Government officials may not be held liable
for the unconstitutional conduct of their subordinates under a
theory

of

respondeat

superior.”)

Therefore,

the

Court

will

dismiss the claims against Willie Bonds and C. Cline without
prejudice.

If Plaintiff can allege facts showing the personal

involvement of Bonds or Cline in violating his constitutional
rights, he may amend his Complaint.
C.

Officer Donaghy and Sergeant Vernell

Plaintiff’s

claims

against

Officer

Donaghy

and

Sergeant

Vernell may proceed.
IV.

CONCLUSION
The

Court

Court

will

will

strike,

grant
as

Plaintiff’s

duplicative

of

IFP

application.

Civil

5950(RBK), paragraphs 22-32 of the Complaint.

Action

No.

The
16-

(ECF No. 1 at 3.)

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) and § 1915A, the Court
will dismiss the § 1983 claims against South Woods State Prison
6 

with

prejudice.

The

Court

will

dismiss

the

§

1983

against Willie Bonds and C. Cline without prejudice.
An appropriate order follows.

s/Renée Marie Bumb
RENÉE MARIE BUMB
United States District Judge
Dated: February 22, 2017

7 

claims