Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Rhoden v. Powers

April 24, 2006

MARVIN RHODEN, PLAINTIFF,
v.
MARVIN F. POWERS, TERRY CALIPER, B. HOUSEWRIGHT, CHARLES L. HINSLEY, GEORGE C. WELBORN AND CAROLYN DUMAS, DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Reagan, District Judge

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Plaintiff, currently an inmate in the Tamms Correctional Center, brings this action for deprivations of his constitutional rights pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff previously was granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and was not required to pay an initial partial filing fee.

To facilitate the orderly management of future proceedings in this case, and in accordance with the objectives of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 8(f) and 10(b), the Court finds it appropriate to break the claims in Plaintiff's pro se complaint into numbered counts, as shown below. The parties and the Court will use these designations in all future pleadings and orders, unless otherwise directed by a judicial officer of this Court. The designation of these counts does not constitute an opinion as to their merit.

COUNT 1: Against defendants Powers, Caliper, Hinsley and Welborn for failing to treat him for lung problems, in violation of his rights under the Eighth Amendment.

COUNT 2: Against Defendants Powers, Caliper, Hinsley and Welborn for failing to provide proper treatment for his athlete's foot, in violation of his rights under the Eighth Amendment.

COUNT 3: Against Defendants Hinsley, Welborn and Housewright for failing to correct problems in the ventilation system at Tamms, in violation of his rights under the eighth Amendment.

COUNT 4: Against Defendants Powers and Hinsley for use of excessive force, in violation of his rights under the Eighth Amendment.

This case is now before the Court for a preliminary review of the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, which provides:

(a) Screening.-- The court shall review, before docketing, if feasible or, in any event, as soon as practicable after docketing, a complaint in a civil action in which a prisoner seeks redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity.

(b) Grounds for Dismissal.-- On review, the court shall identify cognizable claims or dismiss the complaint, or any portion of the complaint, if the complaint--

(1) is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or

(2) seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief.

28 U.S.C. § 1915A. An action or claim is frivolous if "it lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact." Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989). Upon careful review of the complaint and any supporting exhibits, the Court finds it appropriate to exercise its authority under § 1915A; portions of this action are legally frivolous and thus subject to summary dismissal.

COUNT 1

Plaintiff alleges that when he arrived at Tamms in March 1998, he advised Defendants Powers and Caliper that he had been exposed to an inmate who had an active case of tuberculosis. He also told them that he was experiencing some pain in his lungs, and he asked them to take x-rays or administer other tests in order to determine whether he had contracted the disease. He ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.