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.

Arndt v. Unknown Party

September 24, 2008

CHRISTOPHER J. ARNDT, PLAINTIFF,
v.
UNKNOWN PARTY, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Herndon, Chief Judge

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

At the time he filed the instant complaint, Plaintiff was an inmate at the Pinckneyville Correctional Center. Plaintiff brings this action for deprivations of his constitutional rights pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff seeks damages for alleged violations of his constitutional rights. 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). An action fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted if it does not plead "enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 1974 (2007).

Also before the Court is Plaintiff's motion to appoint counsel (Doc. 3).

THE COMPLAINT

Plaintiff alleges that on September 5, 2007, while he was confined at the Tamms Correctional Center (Tamms), a member of the Illinois Department of Corrections's tactical team struck Plaintiff in the back causing injuries to his neck and back. Plaintiff seeks damages against the unknown tactical team officer for allegedly using "unnecessary and excessive force" in violation of Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment rights.

Plaintiff further alleges that Defendant Clark was on duty when the injury occurred. At that time, Defendant Clark was supervising the training of the tactical team. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant Clark was negligent in overseeing the tactical team's training.

Plaintiff states that he filed grievances seeking a job change due to the injuries he sustained to his neck and back. Plaintiff asserts that Defendant Bartley denied his grievances. Plaintiff alleges that he is being forced to work a job that causes him severe pain and which is beyond his physical capabilities in violation of his Eighth Amendment rights.

Plaintiff states that on October 21, 2007, Defendant Clark made him lift a table weighing thirty-five pounds. Plaintiff claims that lifting the table caused him pain and further injury. Plaintiff appears to claim that being ...


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.