United States District Court, S.D. Illinois
KEVIN J. SMITH, Plaintiff,
VENERIO SANTOS and LISA KREBS Defendants.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Phil Gilbert, U.S. District Judge
Kevin J. Smith, an inmate in Centralia Correctional Center,
brings this action for deprivations of his constitutional
rights pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff seeks
compensatory damages 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
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.
originally brought suit in the Central District of Illinois
on January 31, 2017. (Doc. 1) (Doc. 2). After Judge Harold A.
Baker conducted a merits review of that claim, he determined
that some claims, specifically the claims arising out of
Plaintiff's time at Centralia Correctional Center, were
more properly brought in this judicial district, where
Centralia is located. (Doc. 2). The Central District retained
claims arising out of Plaintiff's arrest and detention in
a local jail, and those claims do not proceed in this action.
the claims arising out of Plaintiff's time at Centralia,
Plaintiff has alleged that his right shoulder had been
replaced in a surgery on February 4, 2016. (Doc. 1, p. 18).
Plaintiff's shoulder was re-injured during his arrest on
April 1, 2016, and the jail declined to treat Plaintiff's
condition because his placement in the Illinois Department of
Corrections (“IDOC”) was imminent. (Doc. 1, pp.
17-18). However, the Knox County Jail doctor opined that
Plaintiff's bicep had been torn and that he needed an
MRI. (Doc. 1, p. 18). Once Plaintiff arrived at Centralia,
Dr. Santos examined his arm, but provided no treatment. (Doc.
1, pp. 18-19). As a result of the lack of treatment,
Plaintiff has experienced pain and suffering. (Doc. 1, p.
19). A grievance attached to the Complaint states that other
doctors have told Plaintiff that he needs an MRI and possibly
surgery, but that when Santos examined his arm, he told
Plaintiff he just needed to exercise. (Doc. 1, pp. 15-16).
filed a grievance on this issue on September 29, 2016. (Doc.
1, p. 15). The grievance officer response indicates that Lisa
Krebs was contacted and advised that Plaintiff was being
evaluated. (Doc. 1, p. 14). Plaintiff also wrote a letter to
Krebs about his bicep. (Doc. 1, p. 19). Krebs wrote back and
told Plaintiff that she would have him rescheduled to be
reevaluated. Id. Plaintiff alleges that Krebs never
actually rescheduled him. Id.
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 this designation in all future
pleadings and orders, unless otherwise directed by a judicial
officer of this Court. The following claim survives threshold
Count 1 - Santos and Krebs were deliberately indifferent to
Plaintiff's serious medical need when they failed to take
action to treat and evaluate his torn bicep ...