The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gilbert, District Judge
Plaintiff, currently an inmate at the Missouri Eastern Correctional Center, brings this action for deprivations of his constitutional rights pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and § 1985(3). 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.
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, 590 U.S. 544, 570 (2007). A complaint is plausible on its face "when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009). Although the Court is obligated to accept factual allegations as true, some factual allegations may be so sketchy or implausible that they fail to provide sufficient notice of a plaintiff's claim. Brooks v. Ross, 578 F.3d 574, 581 (7th Cir. 2009). Additionally, Courts "should not accept as adequate abstract recitations of the elements of a cause of action or conclusory legal statements." Id. At the same time, however, the factual allegations of a pro se complaint are to be liberally construed. Rodriguez v. Plymouth Ambulance Service, 577 F.3d 816, 821 (7th Cir. 2009).
Liberally construing the complaint and attached exhibits, Plaintiff was being pursued by various police officers from jurisdictions in the State of Missouri. Plaintiff then crossed into Illinois and the Missouri officers were joined in the pursuit by officers from the State of Illinois. The pursuit ended shortly after Plaintiff crossed into Illinois when his vehicle became disabled. Plaintiff attempted to flee on foot, but was apprehended by the pursuing law enforcement officers. Plaintiff asserts that he was tasered and, while incapacitated and unconsdious, the arresting officers used "excessive force"on him (e.g. repeatedly tasering him and striking him) causing him physical injury (e.g., a collapsed lung). Some of the named defendants are not alleged to have participated directly in the use of force against Plaintiff, but are alleged to be supervising police officers who failed to intervene in the allegedly unconstitutional actions of the arresting officers. Plaintiff also alleges that the defendants conspired to deprive him of his rights.
Claims of excessive force during an arrest are analyzed under the Fourth Amendment's "reasonableness" standard. See Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989). In determining the reasonableness of the force used, a Court will consider the facts and circumstances of the case, the severity of the crime at issue, the threat posed by the suspect to the safety of the officers or others, and whether the suspect was attempting to resist or evade arrest. The objective reasonableness of the officers' response will be based upon the information the officers had at the time of the arrest. See Lawrence v. Kenosha County, 391 F.3d 837, 843 (7th Cir. 2004). Based on these standards, Plaintiff's claims of excessive force and conspiracy during his arrest cannot be dismissed at this time.
The Clerk is DIRECTED to prepare Form 1A (Notice of Lawsuit and Request for Waiver of Service of Summons) and Form 1B (Waiver of Service of Summons) for Defendants Adrian, Tomas, Orr, Lemonds, Kinnison, Miller, McDaniel, Lynch, and Malner.. The Clerk shall forward those forms, USM-285 forms submitted by Plaintiff, ...