United States District Court, S.D. Illinois
CORBIN D. JONES, # 01-30-1989-46, Plaintiff,
JENNIFER ROBERTS, LT. HANES, LT. BONNIE MAY, C/O SPARTEGUES, CAPT. MOUNT, C/O JEFF CLARK, NURSE SHIRLEY, DR. PAULIUS, C/O FORTAG, C/O EDWARDS, DEPUTY TRAVIS SCOTT, C/O CONWAY, and C/O McKINNIS, Defendants.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
PHIL GILBERT UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
matter is now before the Court for a merits review of
Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint (Doc. 16). About a
month after Plaintiff filed this pleading, he submitted a
proposed “supplement.” On September 19, 2017, the
Court denied Plaintiff's implied motion to add the
supplementary material to the First Amended Complaint in a
piecemeal fashion. (Doc. 22). Plaintiff was then given the
opportunity to submit a Second Amended Complaint in which he
could incorporate the material in his proposed supplement,
and he was ordered to file that amended pleading no later
than October 11, 2017. Plaintiff's deadline has now
passed, and he has not filed a Second Amended Complaint. The
First Amended Complaint, without the proposed supplementary
information, is now subject to review under 28 U.S.C. §
1915A requires the Court to screen prisoner complaints to
filter out non-meritorious claims. See 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915A(a). The Court must dismiss any portion of the
complaint that is legally frivolous, malicious, fails to
state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or asks for
money damages from a defendant who by law is immune from such
relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). Plaintiff has been
released from custody, so he is not currently a prisoner.
However, he was incarcerated at the Jefferson County Jail
when this action was filed, thus the screening requirement of
§ 1915A as well as the other provisions of the Prison
Litigation Reform Act (“PLRA”) apply to
Plaintiff's case. See Kerr v. Puckett, 138 F.3d
321, 323 (7th Cir. 1998) (a plaintiff's status as a
prisoner or non-prisoner for purposes of the applicability of
the PLRA must be determined as of the time the lawsuit is
filed) (citing Abdul-Wadood v. Nathan, 91 F.3d 1023
(7th Cir. 1996)).
June 12, 2017, order that directed Plaintiff to file the
First Amended Complaint (Doc. 14), the Court described
Plaintiff's claims (based on the original Complaint which
was dismissed) as follows:
Count 5: Excessive force claim against the
unidentified officers who arrested Jones on February 13 or
14, 2017, for applying handcuffs to Jones' wrists so
tightly that his hands were swollen for several days;
Count 6: Deliberate indifference claim
against unidentified jail staff for the failure to provide
Jones with medical testing for communicable diseases
following his exposure to a cellmate's blood after the
cellmate's suicide attempt;
Count 7: Deliberate indifference claim
against unidentified jail staff for the failure to provide
Jones with cleaning supplies or to clean the areas in and
near his cell that were contaminated with blood;
Count 8: Deliberate indifference claim
against Scott, Mount, Haynes, and Nurse Shirley for failing
to provide Jones with medical treatment for burns and cuts on
his arms sustained before his arrest;
Count 9: First Amendment claim for the
improper opening and destruction/loss of Jones' legal
mail, against Edwards, Spartegues, Jeff, and Roberts;
Count 10: Deliberate indifference claim
against Haynes and Roberts for the failure to permit Jones to
leave the cell for recreation;
Count 11: Deliberate indifference claim
against unidentified jail staff for placing Jones in a cell
with insufficient heat, bedding, or clothing; exposing him to
black mold, rusty drinking water, and insects; and serving
him spoiled milk and soggy food.
Plaintiff was ordered to file a First Amended Complaint, he
was instructed to “present each claim in a separate
count” in accordance with the designations above. (Doc.
14, p. 11). However, the First Amended Complaint does not
refer to any of these numbered counts. He was also told to
specify each Defendant by name who was alleged to be liable
under each count. Id. Plaintiff does this for some
of the claims, but not for others. The factual allegations in
the First Amended Complaint are summarized below.
First Amended Complaint (Doc. 14)
had injured his arms and hands at work before he was arrested
in February 2017 and confined at the Jefferson County Jail.
He had severe razor blade cuts on his hands and painful acid
burns. Every time Plaintiff washed his hands, skin would come
off the burned areas. (Doc. 16, pp. 5, 10-11). He reported
his need for medical treatment for these injuries to Lt.
Hanes (sometimes referred to in the narrative as Haynes),
Nurse Shirley, Lt. May, C/O Conway, C/O McKinnis, C/O
Edwards, C/O Clark, C/O Fortag, C/O Spartegues, C/O Roberts,
Scott, and Capt. Mount. (Doc. 16, pp. 5, 9, 15). However,
they refused to do anything to treat Plaintiff's wounds.
Id. Hanes told Plaintiff to put his hands into the
water in the toilet bowl to relieve the pain, and Plaintiff
did so for about 3 hours (possibly more than once) because he
had no alternative. (Doc. 16, pp. 5-6). At some point
Plaintiff was put into a padded room while jail staff waited
for instructions from Dr. Paulius. Somebody then gave
Plaintiff 2 tablets of Tylenol, 1 Cogentine tablet, and 1
Zyprexa tablet. (Doc. 1, p. 5).
was kept for 2 days in a “freezing cold holding
cell” where he was not given sufficient clothing to
keep warm. (Doc. 16, p. 9). He also mentions poor
ventilation, bug infestations, exposure to communicable
diseases, and water contamination. (Doc. 16, p. 17).
page dated April 11, 2017, Plaintiff states that he needed to
have his wisdom teeth removed on both sides, top and bottom,
and he had bleeding in his mouth from those areas. He
reported this problem to Edwards, Hanes, and Nurse Shirley,
but they refused to provide any medical care. (Doc. 16, pp.
states that his “religious freedom right” was
violated because he had not been allowed to attend a
religious service. (Doc. 16, p. 13).
mentions an incident where others were given extra food, but
does not explain further. Id. He also requested a
T.B. shot but apparently did not receive it. (Doc. 16, p.
cell was contaminated with another inmate's blood after a
suicide attempt, and was not properly cleaned. Somebody used
“sewage water” and ammonia in a cleaning attempt,
and this produced fumes that persisted and caused Plaintiff
to feel nauseous because of the poor ventilation. (Doc. 16,
p. 16). For 6 days between March 29 and April 4, 2017,
Plaintiff requested cleaning supplies, but Hanes and Conway
failed to provide any. The cellmate's blood exposed
Plaintiff to Hepatitis C.
Plaintiff mentions “physical testing of prisoners
bodies . . . for AIDS, Hepatitis C, HIV, ” which he was
exposed to because of the blood left in the cell. (Doc. 16,
p. 17). He notes problems with “privacy rights” .
. . “such as my legal ...