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.

Faison v. Defendant Ward

United States District Court, S.D. Illinois

November 7, 2016

JEAN-MARC FAISON, Plaintiff,
v.
DEFENDANT WARD Defendant.

          MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

          STACI M. YANDLE United States District Judge.

         Plaintiff Jean-Marc Faison, an inmate in Menard Correctional Center, brings this action for deprivations of his constitutional rights pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff requests injunctive relief and punitive damages.

         On July 27, 2016, the claim in this case was severed from a case Plaintiff originally filed on June 2, 2016 (Doc. 1). Since these claims were severed, Plaintiff has filed two motions. The first motion, filed on August 4, 2016, states that Plaintiff does not wish to sue Defendant Ward in a separate action and wants to voluntarily dismiss the action before any filing fees are assessed. (Doc. 6). Plaintiff also filed a Motion for Reconsideration, again stating that he did not intend to proceed in a separate case and asking the Court to dismiss the case prior to assessing an additional filing fee. (Doc. 7). That motion was filed August 11, 2016. The Court assessed a filing fee on August 3, 2016, prior to either motion being filed. (Doc. 5). Because it appears that Plaintiffs main purpose in moving to dismiss this action was to avoid the imposition of a filing fee and because the fee has already been imposed, the Court will DENY Plaintiffs Motion to Dismiss and his Motion to Reconsider and proceed to threshold review. If Plaintiff wishes to voluntarily dismiss his case after threshold review, he may do so.

         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). Frivolousness is an objective standard that refers to a claim that any reasonable person would find meritless. Lee v. Clinton, 209 F.3d 1025, 1026-27 (7th Cir. 2000). 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, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007). The claim of entitlement to relief must cross "the line between possibility and plausibility." Id. at 557. At this juncture, the factual allegations of the pro se complaint are to be liberally construed. See Rodriguez v. Plymouth Ambulance Serv., 577 F.3d816, 821 (7th Cir. 2009).

         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 subject to summary dismissal.

         The Complaint

         Plaintiff alleges that during a urine test for drugs, Defendant Ward asked him to show his penis. (Doc. 2, p. 5). Plaintiff requested a pat-down instead, but Defendant Ward insisted that he watch Plaintiff urinate. (Doc. 2, p. 5).

         Discussion

         Based on the allegations of the Complaint, the Court finds it convenient to divide the pro se action into one count. The parties and the Court will use these designations in all future pleadings and orders, ...


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.