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.

Lomax v. Baldwin

United States District Court, S.D. Illinois

May 10, 2018

TYRON LOMAX, Plaintiff,
v.
JOHN BALDWIN, KAREN JAIMET, CHRISTINE BROWN, MARSHA HILL, and VAUGHN Defendants.

          MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

          MICHAEL J. REAGAN U.S. CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE.

s Plaintiff Tyron Lomax, an inmate in Pinckneyville Correctional Center, brings this action for deprivations of his constitutional rights pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief and damages. 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 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).

         The Complaint

         Plaintiff is disabled and uses a wheelchair. (Doc. 1, pp. 6-7). He alleges that he needs a hip replacement. (Doc. 1, p. 7). Plaintiff was transferred to Pinckneyville on April 3, 2018. (Doc. 1, p. 8). During the transfer, Plaintiff was dumped out of his wheelchair by a guard not named in this action. Id. Plaintiff was interviewed by Marsha Hill (sometimes identified as Jane Doe in the Complaint) and told her about the fall, the metal screws and plates in his hip, and that he needed a hip replacement. (Doc. 1, pp. 8-9). Plaintiff also told Hill that he was in chronic and substantial pain as a result of the fall. (Doc. 1, p. 9). Hill refused to send Plaintiff to the doctor or address his chronic pain or other medical issues. Id.

         Plaintiff was assigned to a cell with another disabled inmate who uses diapers, catheters, and a urine bag. (Doc. 1, p. 9). Vaughn refuses to open Plaintiff's cell to allow Plaintiff or his cellmate to timely dispose of the used diapers and catheters, or allow an inmate worker in to clean regularly. Id. Vaughn also denies Plaintiff showers because Plaintiff cannot move to the cell door fast enough to get in line for showers. Id.

         On April 10, 2018, Plaintiff fell in the shower and was injured because the chair in the shower was not ADA-compliant. Id. Brown, the ADA coordinator at Pinckneyville, failed to make the shower ADA-complaint and provide an adequate shower chair. (Doc. 1, p. 10). The number of shower chairs at Pinckneyville is insufficient generally. Id.

         Discussion

         Based on the allegations of the Complaint, the Court finds it convenient to divide the pro se action into 3 counts. The parties and the Court will use these designations in all future pleadings and orders, unless otherwise directed by a judicial officer of this Court. The following claims survive threshold review:

Count 1 - Hill was deliberately indifferent to Plaintiff's chronic pain in his hip, particularly after he was dumped out of his chair on April 3, 2018 in ...

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.