United States District Court, S.D. Illinois
JUAN J. FLORES, #N90266, Plaintiff,
NICHOLAS LAMB, M. WEAVER, MR. TANNER, MR. BROOKS, LT. OCHS, and MS. HOPPER, Defendants.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Herndon Judge United States District Judge.
Juan Flores, an inmate who is currently incarcerated at
Lincoln Correctional Center, brings this action pursuant to
42 U.S.C. § 1983 against officials at Lawrence
Correctional Center (“Lawrence”). In the
Complaint, Plaintiff alleges that prison officials ignored
his medical permit for a lower gallery and low bunk
assignment on February 11, 2017, when a plumbing problem at
the prison necessitated a “mass move” of inmates
from the lower galleries to the upper galleries. (Doc. 1, pp.
6-10). Following the move, Plaintiff fell down the stairs and
injured himself. Id. He now sues those prison
officials who refused to honor his permit when moving him to
a new cell. Id. Plaintiff seeks monetary damages and
injunctive relief. (Doc. 1, p. 10).
Complaint is now subject to preliminary review pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1915A, which provides:
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.
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.
to the allegations in the Complaint, Plaintiff was housed in
a lower gallery at Lawrence (Cell 7-B-Lower-20) on February
11, 2017, when a plumbing problem necessitated the
“mass move” of inmates to cells in the upper
galleries. (Doc. 1, pp. 6-7). At the time, Plaintiff was in
possession of a medical permit for a lower gallery and low
bunk. Id. The prison's physician, Doctor Coe,
issued the permit for an indefinite term on July 18, 2016.
Id. The defendants were aware of the permit when
they made the decision to move Plaintiff to an upper gallery
(Cell 6-A-Upper-16). Id.
were allegedly moved to highly undesirable locations. (Doc.
1, p. 9). They were placed in cells with prisoners who were
deemed to be mentally ill, predatory, or unsanitary.
Id. Plaintiff does not describe his own living
arrangements, cell assignment, or conditions after the move.
Id. However, he says that the staff had a widespread
practice of “turning a blind eye” to these living
arrangements, regardless of the safety hazards they posed to
February 13, 2017, Plaintiff fell down the stairs while
attempting to use the phone. (Doc. 1, p. 7). C/O
Johnson witnessed the fall, as did several
inmates. Id. Plaintiff sustained injuries to his
back and hip that resulted in a loss of mobility.
Id. He now requires an assistive device.
Id. He also suffers from pain that necessitates his
use of medication on a daily basis. Id. Plaintiff
does not assert a claim for the denial of medical care
arising from his fall. (Doc. 1).
instead brings this suit against those prison officials who
were responsible for moving him to an upper gallery, in
violation of his medical permit. (Doc. 1, pp. 1-3). This
includes C/O Weaver and C/O Hopper, the two placement
officers who were responsible for classifying inmates and
making housing decisions on February 11, 2017. Id.
He also names C/O Tanner and C/O Brooks, two wing officers
who coordinated the transfer of inmates from the lower
galleries to the upper galleries on February 11, 2017. (Doc.
1, p. 7). Plaintiff informed both wing officers about his
medical permit before the move, and they promised to transfer
him to a cell in the lower gallery once the plumbing problem
was addressed. Id. Plaintiff also names two
supervisory officials, Zone Lieutenant Ochs and Warden Lamb,
both of whom were allegedly aware of his medical permit on
February 11, 2017. (Doc. 1, p. 8).
asserts claims against the defendants under the Eighth
Amendment. (Doc. 1, pp. 6-9). He seeks monetary damages
against them. (Doc. 1, p. 10). He also seeks an injunction
prohibiting Lawrence officials from interfering with his
ability to exhaust his administrative remedies by mishandling
his grievances and prohibiting prison officials from placing