United States District Court, S.D. Illinois
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Herndon, United States District Judge.
Terry Rogers, an inmate in Menard Correctional Center, brings
this action for deprivations of his constitutional rights
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for events that happened at
Lawrence Correctional Center and Menard Correctional Center.
Plaintiff requests damages and injunctive relief in the form
of a transfer out of Menard. 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
was incarcerated at Lawrence Correctional Center on August
24, 2017. (Doc. 1, p. 6). Plaintiff got into an argument with
C/O Stout over Plaintiff's personal property box.
Id. Stout then opened Plaintiff's cell and
pushed Plaintiff, causing him to fall and hit his head on the
steel frame of his bed. (Doc. 1, p. 7). Plaintiff experienced
dizziness and excruciating pain. Id. Stout then
continued to assault Plaintiff by slamming him on the ground
and punching him, causing injury. Id. Plaintiff
caught his thumb on the ground when Stout slammed him;
Plaintiff believes that Stout broke his thumb at that time.
(Doc. 1, p. 8).
reporting the assault and being examined in the health care
unit, Plaintiff was transferred to Menard Correctional
Center. (Doc. 1, pp. 9-10). Engelage, Howell, John Does
#1-#3, and Fitzgerald met Plaintiff when he arrived. (Doc. 1,
p. 10). Howell put handcuffs on Plaintiff so tightly that
they caused excruciating pain and cut into Plaintiff's
skin. Id. Plaintiff complained the handcuffs were
too tight, at which point Howell, Fitzgerald, and John Does
#1-3 all began beating Plaintiff. (Doc. 1, pp. 10-11).
Engelage watched but failed to intervene. (Doc. 1, p. 11).
Defendants told Plaintiff the beating was in retaliation for
what had happened at Lawrence, and Engelage promised
Plaintiff “the shit treatment.” (Doc. 1, pp.
11-12). Plaintiff requested medical attention for the beating
and his shortness of breath (Plaintiff is asthmatic) from
Howell and one of John Does #1-3, but they ignored him. (Doc.
1, pp. 12-13).
was placed in N2 cell 217. (Doc. 1, p. 12) Howell directed
John Does # 4 and 5 to shut off the water in Plaintiff's
cell, and they did. (Doc. 1, p. 13). Howell and one of John
Does #1-3 returned to Plaintiff's cell and gave him a
dirty wet mattress that had blood and urine stains on it and
was infested with bugs. Id. Plaintiff requested a
new mattress, along with bedding, toilet tissue, toothpaste,
soap, deodorant and a towel, but Howell just told him that he
was slow and didn't understand the shit treatment. (Doc.
1, pp. 13-14). Plaintiff continued to ask Ashston, Doe #6,
Dulaney, Doe #7, Doe #8, Adams, Doe #10, and Doe #11 to
remedy his conditions of confinement, but all of them
refused. (Doc. 1, pp. 14-21). Ashton also refused to turn off
Plaintiff's light on August 25, 2017. (Doc. 1, p. 15).
Plaintiff alleges that he spent 5 days without water, and
that he was forced to endure the smells from his toilet,
which were exacerbated by the summer heat. (Doc. 1, pp.
23-24). The smells triggered Plaintiff's asthma, and he
was also denied access to his inhaler during this time.
Id. Plaintiff was moved to another cell on August
29, 2017. (Doc. 1, p. 23).
gave Plaintiff an empty food tray at breakfast on August 25,
2017. (Doc. 1, p. 15). Other C/Os, including Doe #6, Dulaney,
Doe #7, Doe #8, Adams, Doe #10, Doe #11, also gave Plaintiff
empty trays between August 25, 2017 and August 27, 2017.
(Doc. 1, pp. 16-21). Plaintiff was ultimately only fed on 2
occasions during a 5-day period. (Doc. 1, p. 24).
wrote Warden Lashbrook a letter detailing his need for
medical treatment and reporting the assault on August 25,
2017. (Doc. 1, p. 17). He also wrote several sick call slips
and 2 grievances. (Doc. 1, pp. 17-18).
repeatedly requested medical attention for his injuries, but
Ashston, Doe #6, and Dulaney denied his requests. (Doc. 1, p.
14, 16-17). On August 26, 2017, Plaintiff requested medical
care from Shaya while she passed out medication, and told her
about his cell conditions. (Doc. 1, p. 19). Shaya looked at
Doe #9, and he told Shaya not to help Plaintiff. (Doc. 1, p.
20). Plaintiff requested medical care from Reba on August 27,
2017 while she was passing out medication, but Doe #12 told
Reba not to help Plaintiff and she walked away. (Doc. 1, p.
22). The same thing happened the next day on August 28, 2017
when Plaintiff asked Elizabeth for help, and John Doe #14
told her to refuse. (Doc. 1, p. 23).
was finally seen by N.P. Moldenhauer on August 31, 2017, but
once Plaintiff alluded to the alleged assault, Moldenhauer
refused to treat him. (Doc. 1, pp. 25-28). Plaintiff grieved
this issue to Lashbrook. (Doc. 1, p. 28). Plaintiff waited 29
days for treatment before being seen by Ron. Id.
Plaintiff told Ron about the alleged assault, at which point
Ron stated “Oh, you won't be getting any Menard
money, ” and then refused to continue treating
Plaintiff. (Doc. 1, p. 29). Ron only provided ibuprofen.
Id. Plaintiff saw Ron again on October 9, 2017, but
Ron once again refused to provide any treatment. (Doc. 1, p.
30). Plaintiff also saw Moldenhauer on October 12, 2017, and
requested physical therapy for his thumb, but Moldenhauer
only gave him more ibuprofen. (Doc. 1, pp. 30-31).
Moldenhauer eventually ordered Naproxen and an x-ray. (Doc.
1, p. 31).
October 21, 2017, Fitzgerald came to his cell and told
Plaintiff that he got off lightly for a staff-assaulter, and
that “since you want to whine and write grievances, and
complain about it, I got something worse in store for you,
don't think the cameras up here can save you, time for
bed you piece of shit.” (Doc. 1, p. 32). Fitzgerald
then turned off Plaintiff's light. Id.
received a disciplinary report based on the altercation with
Stout 76 days later written by J. Molenhour. (Doc. 1, pp. 33,
36). Plaintiff alleges that the disciplinary report was
fabricated in retaliation for Plaintiff writing grievances.
Id. It was ultimately dismissed for not being filed
in a timely manner. Id.
requested that Lashbrook transfer him out of Menard, but she
denied his request. (Doc. 1, p. 34). Likewise, Baldwin ...