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.

Strong v. Campanella

United States District Court, S.D. Illinois

June 17, 2017

DEANDRE STRONG, Plaintiff,
v.
REED and JEANNE CAMPANELLA Defendants.

          MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

          STACI M. YANDLE U.S. District Judge.

         Plaintiff DeAndre Strong, an inmate in Centralia Correctional Center, brings this action for deprivations of his constitutional rights pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for events that occurred at Vienna Correctional Center. Plaintiff requests punitive damages as well as costs and fees. 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.3d 816, 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. This action is subject to summary dismissal.

         The Complaint

         On September 30, 2016 at 10:30 pm, Plaintiff was in his assigned cell talking and joking with his cellmate when inmate Shawn Bowens came into his cell and attacked him. (Doc. 1, p. 5). Bowens hit and kneed Plaintiff in the face. Id. He then told Plaintiff's roommate to get out and told Plaintiff that he'd be right back. Id. After they both left, Plaintiff locked the door to his cell. Id. Bowens came back and demanded that Plaintiff open the door and Plaintiff refused. Id.

         The shift changed at approximately 11:00 pm. Id. At 4:30 am, Plaintiff reported the assault to the female correctional officer. Id. Plaintiff was placed on investigative status and sent to the health care unit for his injuries. Id. Bowens was eventually found guilty of the assault and transferred to Shawnee Correctional Center. (Doc. 1, p. 10).

         Plaintiff alleges that Defendant Reed was the officer on duty at the time of the assault, and that Reed failed to do his assigned walk through. (Doc. 1, p. 5). He further alleges that if Reed had done the check as he was supposed to, he could have prevented the attack on Plaintiff or intervened to stop it. (Doc. 1, p. 6).

         Discussion

         Based on the allegations of the Complaint, the Court finds it convenient to divide the pro se action into 1 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.