United States District Court, S.D. Illinois
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Michael J. Reagan, U.S. Chief District Judge.
Patrick Franklin, an inmate in Robinson Correctional Center
(“Robinson”), brings this action pursuant to 42
U.S.C. § 1983 for deprivations of his constitutional
rights. In his Complaint, Plaintiff claims the defendants
have been deliberately indifferent to his serious medical
issues in violation of the Eighth Amendment. (Doc. 1). 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 allow this case to proceed
past the threshold stage.
Complaint (Doc. 1), Plaintiff makes the following
allegations: when Plaintiff arrived at Robinson in August
2016, he requested a bottom bunk because of weight problems.
(Doc. 1, p. 5). Plaintiff's counselor, Ms. Carrell, gave
him a bottom bunk immediately. Id. In April 2017,
Plaintiff was moved to a top bunk because the bottom bunk was
needed for an inmate in a wheelchair. Id. Plaintiff
has since requested to be moved to another bottom bunk by
writing request slips to health care. Id. The
request slips stated that Plaintiff is “overweight, 350
plus pounds, and [has] issues with climbing and hurting
[himself].” Id. Dr. Shah responded to the
request slips stating that Plaintiff should exercise and lose
April 12, 2017, Plaintiff hurt himself by falling down the
ladder in the middle of the night while he was trying to get
down to go to the bathroom. Id. He went to
healthcare for his injury and saw Shah. Id.
Plaintiff told Shah that he was in pain and that his elbow
and arm were making a loud popping sound. Id. Shah
responded by telling Plaintiff to buy pain medication at the
inmate commissary. Id. As of September 1, 2017,
Plaintiff was “still seeking medical attention Dr/Physc
Dr.” Id. Plaintiff “feel[s] Dr. Shah
should have responded to [his] needs in a respectful manner
and signed off on a bottom bunk to prevent [Plaintiff] from
getting hurt.” Id. Plaintiff also
“feel[s] that Warden Rains and IDOC should have a
policy in place that prevents these problems of overweight
people that have problems of climbing on the top bunk.”
Id. Plaintiff has been receiving help from other
inmates to get into the top bunk at night. Id.
on the allegations of the Complaint, the Court finds it
convenient to designate a single count in this pro
se action. 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
designation of this count does not constitute an opinion
regarding its merit.
Count 1 - Defendants showed deliberate
indifference to Plaintiff's serious medical need for a
low bunk permit and pain associated with an injury he
sustained climbing down from his top bunk, in ...