Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Pasley v. Crammer

United States District Court, S.D. Illinois

April 18, 2018

SUNTEZ PASLEY, et al., Plaintiff,
v.
CRAMMER, COLE, COOK, PHILIPS, ROSS, HAWKINS, and SNYDER Defendants.

          MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

          J. Phil Gilbert U.S. District Judge.

         Plaintiff Suntez Pasley, an inmate in the Alton Law Enforcement Center, brings this action for deprivations of his constitutional rights pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff requests damages and injunctive relief. This case is now before the Court for a preliminary review of the Amended 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 such relief.

         An 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. 2009).

         Upon careful review of the Amended Complaint and any supporting exhibits, the Court finds it appropriate to exercise its authority under § 1915A; this action is subject to summary dismissal. Additionally, there are 2 motions currently pending in this action. For the reasons stated below, proposed third-party intervenor George Rhodes' Motion for Joinder is DENIED. (Doc. 44). Plaintiff's Motion to Amend is also DENIED. (Doc. 46).

         The Amended Complaint

         Plaintiff originally filed suit with several co-plaintiffs on October 10, 2017. (Doc. 1). The Court entered a Boriboune Order warning plaintiffs of the risks of multi-party litigation, and as a result, several plaintiffs dropped out of the suit. (Doc. 3) (Doc. 26). The Court then screened the Complaint on January 10, 2018 and found that some claims failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted, and a fourth claim was legally frivolous. (Doc. 29). The Court directed the plaintiffs to file an Amended Complaint no later than February 8, 2018 on Counts 1-3. (Doc. 29). Instead of filing a joint amended complaint, plaintiffs filed individual amended complaints. (Docs. 36, 38-41). On this basis, and because plaintiffs' claims did not appear to arise out of the same transaction or occurrence pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 20, the Court severed this action and placed each Plaintiff in his own suit. (Doc. 43). This matter is now before the Court to screen the Amended Complaint filed by Suntez Pasley on February 8, 2018. (Doc. 41).

         Plaintiff alleges that he has been incarcerated at the Alton City Jail from September 25, 2017 until the present. (Doc. 41, p. 5). Plaintiff alleges that he is being denied access to the courts because there is no law library at the Jail, and that he is being denied access to the current sentencing guideline manual. Id.

         Plaintiff also alleges that he is being subjected to unconstitutional conditions of confinement. Id. Specifically, he alleges that he was confined to his cell 23 hours a day, subjected to unclean showers, and that showers have to be taken during recreation time, cutting into Plaintiff's 1 hour of recreation. Id. There was also cold air blowing into Plaintiff's cell while it was cold outside. Id. Plaintiff also alleges that he was subjected to inadequate nutrition. Id.

         Plaintiff alleges that he addressed his access to courts issues and conditions of confinement issues to all named defendants. Id. Plaintiff alleges that he has been prescribed stool softeners and sleeping medication. (Doc. 41, p. 6). Lt. Cramer also allegedly made a false claim that Plaintiff was ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.