United States District Court, S.D. Illinois
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Phil Gilbert U.S. District Judge
Jarrod Robinson, a detainee at Chester Mental Health Center,
brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for
alleged deprivations of his constitutional rights. In his
Complaint, Plaintiff claims, among other things, that
Defendant Manskem subjected him to excessive force. (Doc. 1).
This case is now before the Court for a preliminary review of
the Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, which
(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: Plaintiff was assaulted by Officer Ewing
on December 9 of an unspecified year. (Doc. 1, p. 2).
Plaintiff's hand was sliced open to the bone.
Id. Officer Ewing, Yandel, Haang, Zuhlke, and Hanes
said it appeared to be a minor contusion and asked Plaintiff
why he did it to himself. Id. After Ewing and other
officers exited and returned, they asked Plaintiff to put his
hands behind his back, even though he was severely bleeding,
so that he could be taken to medical for medical attention.
Id. Plaintiff believes the seriousness of the injury
suggested that he should have been taken to the emergency
room. Id. The Shift Commander, Hanes, was advised
that all was well. Id.
Edmisson brought Plaintiff things to treat his wounds, but he
continued to lose “massive amounts of blood and started
to feel sick and lightheaded.” (Doc. 1, pp. 3-4).
Plaintiff hit his emergency button and discovered later that
day that Jeffery Clark had isolated his intercom. (Doc. 1, p.
4). On December 11, 2017, Plaintiff was punched in the face
by Craig Manskem on camera. Id. He suffered multiple
“abrasions, contusions, and many other injuries.”
Id. He was choked and beaten severely by Manskem.
Id. C/O McKinnies tased Plaintiff as Jesse Garcia
attempted to place him in metal restraints. Id.
Plaintiff claims there was no justification for his being
tased or struck in the face. Id.
pressed his emergency button to notify someone that he was in
need of immediate medical attention. (Doc. 1, p. 5). He lost
consciousness and hit his head. Id. Plaintiff was
put on a stretcher and into an ambulance. Id.
Plaintiff arrived at an emergency room. Id. It hurt
for him to breathe. Id. Plaintiff received a CT
Scan, and he was told by a doctor that everything appeared
normal but that they were still awaiting certain lab results.
Id. It was discovered that Plaintiff's heart
enzymes “were way off the chart.” (Doc. 1, p. 8).
of Plaintiff's Complaint is covered in notes of various
sizes and orientations. (Doc. 1, p. 9). He lists various
individuals he claims to be pursuing legal proceedings
against, including Doctor Lochard, Walther Hughes, and
Catherine Durbin. Id. A large portion of page 10 is
illegible. (Doc. 1, p. 10). One legible portion notes that
“Robinson” has been subjected to multiple
aggravated assaults and battery and that Plaintiff has been
subjected to cruel, unusual, inhumane, and unsanitary living
environments. Id. Page 10 comes after what appears
to be Plaintiff's signature page on which he wrote
“End of Narrative” in very large print.
Id. It is unclear whether Plaintiff intends for it
to be included as part of the statement of claim.
Id. Page 11 is the previously mentioned Information
with handwritten notes in the margins and ...