United States District Court, S.D. Illinois
JAMES W. BOWLIN, JR., Plaintiff,
JON TORBECK, TYLOR BUTTS, BRYAN GLIDDEN, CHRIS SMITH, and FAYETTE COUNTY JAIL Defendants.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Phil Gilbert U.S. District Judge
James W. Bowlin, Jr., an inmate in Fayette County Jail,
brings this action for deprivations of his constitutional
rights pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff seeks
injunctive relief and compensatory damages. 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.
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
August 24, 2017, an inmate at Fayette County jail had a
seizure and fell in the shower. (Doc. 1, p. 5). The fall
sliced his face open from eye to chin, and blood went
everywhere. Id. When the jail officers learned that
the injured man had Hepatitis C, they left the cell block and
told the inmates to clean up the blood. Id.
Plaintiff asked Butts and Torbeck for protective gloves
and/or a mask, but was told he couldn't have any. (Doc.
1, pp. 5-6). Plaintiff and several other inmates had to clean
up the blood without masks, gloves, or help. (Doc. 1, p. 5).
on the allegations of the Complaint, the Court finds it
convenient to divide the pro se action into a single 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
Count 1 - Butts and Torbeck were
deliberately indifferent to a serious risk of harm when they
exposed Plaintiff to blood containing Hepatitis C without
adequate safeguards like a mask and/or gloves.
status at the Fayette County Jail is not completely clear; he
may be a pre-trial detainee. However, the Seventh Circuit has
found that it is not error for a district court to use the
Eighth Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment standards
interchangeably. See Sain v. Wood, 512 F.3d ...