BETANCOURTH v. LEHIGH COUNTY JAIL et al

Filing 2

MEMORANDUM AND/OR OPINION. SIGNED BY HONORABLE GENE E.K. PRATTER ON 1/26/17. 1/26/17 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO PRO SE PLAINTIFF. (jpd,)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION

CHRISTOPHER ALEXANDER BETANCOURTH

FILED

v.
LEHIGH COUNTY JAIL WARDEN:
JANINE DONATE, et al.

JAN 2 6 2017

NO. 17-0288

KATE BARKMAN, Clerk
Dep. Clerk

MEMORANDUM
PRATTER, J.

JANUARY

~

By
I

2017

Christopher Alexander Betancourth has filed a pro se 42
U.S.C.

§

1983 civil rights lawsuit against members of the staff

at the Lehigh County Jail.

He alleges that he was injured when

he slipped and fell in some water leaking from an access panel at
the prison.
The Court grants Mr. Betancourth leave to proceed in
forma pauperis because it appears that he is incapable of paying

the fees to commence this civil action. 1
§

Accordingly, 28 U.S.C.

1915(e) (2) (B) (i) applies, which requires the Court to dismiss

the complaint if it is frivolous.

A complaint is frivolous if it

"lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact," Neitzke v.
Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989), and is legally baseless if it
is "based on an indisputably meritless legal theory."
United States, 67 F.3d 1080, 1085 (3d Cir. 1995).

Deutsch v.

As plaintiff

is proceeding pro se, the Court construes his allegations
liberally.

Higgs v. Att'y Gen., 655 F.3d 333, 339 (3d Cir.

2011).

However, as Mr. Betancourth is a prisoner, he will be
obligated to pay the filing fee in installments in accordance
with the Prison Litigation Reform Act.
See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b).
1

I.

DISCUSSION

In order to bring suit under

§

1983, Mr. Betancourth

must allege that a person acting under color of state law
deprived him of his constitutional rights.
U.S. 42 (1988).

West v. Atkins, 487

There are no allegations in the complaint that

would allow this Court to find that the defendants have violated
Mr. Betancourth's constitutional rights.

Even if prison

officials were negligent because a leak from an access panel was
not repaired for several days, negligent conduct which causes
unintended injury to an inmate does not amount to a
constitutional violation.

See Davidson v. Cannon, 474 U.S. 344,

347 (1986); Daniels v. Williams, 474 U.S. 327, 328 (1986).
Furthermore, Mr. Betancourth states that he received medical
treatment for his injuries immediately after he fell.

II. CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, the Court will dismiss Mr.
Betancourth's complaint as legally frivolous, pursuant to 28
U.S.C.

§

1915(e) (2) (B) (i).

He will not be given leave to amend

because amendment would be futile.
complaint follows.

An

order dismissing this