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.

Gilbertt v. McCoy

United States District Court, S.D. Illinois

November 21, 2019

DONALD RAY GILBERT, Plaintiff,
v.
PATRICK MCCOY, Defendant.

          MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

          J. PHIL GILBERT, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         Plaintiff Donald Gilbert, who is currently being held at the Massac County Jail, brings this action for deprivations of his constitutional rights pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The Court dismissed Plaintiff's complaint on September 26, 2019, for failure to state claim. (Doc. 15). Plaintiff has now filed a First Amended Complaint, (Doc. 18), and two Motions for Status, (Docs. 19 and 20). In the second Motion for Status, Plaintiff also requests to be transferred to another jail. (Doc. 20). The First Amended Complaint and Plaintiff's Motions are now before the Court.

         The Court must first conduct a preliminary review of the First Amended Complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, which requires the Court to screen prisoner complaints and filter out non-meritorious claims. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). Any portion of the First Amended Complaint that is legally frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim for relief, or requests money damages from an immune defendant must be dismissed. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). At this juncture, the factual allegations are liberally construed. Rodriguez v. Plymouth Ambulance Serv., 577 F.3d 816, 821 (7th Cir. 2009).

         The Complaint

         Plaintiff makes the following allegations: Upon arrest for failure to appear in court, Officer Patrick McCoy, with the Massac County Sheriff's Office, twisted Plaintiff's left arm behind his back so hard that his arm was torn out of socket. (Doc. 18, p. 8). He was then placed in a four man cell that was already full and given a thin mat for sleeping, despite the fact he was in continuous pain. The next morning, Plaintiff showed McCoy his arm and asked to see a doctor, but McCoy said no. (Id.). He also asked to see other jail staff, but was told they were not there. (Id. at p. 10). He then asked for a grievance form, but McCoy never brought him one. A few days later, McCoy returned to the cell and told Plaintiff to pack up because he was “bonding out and sent to Jackson County.” At Jackson County Jail, the booking officer had a nurse examine Plaintiff's injured arm. The nurse told Plaintiff that his arm was out of socket. Jackson County Jail would not take Plaintiff until he was cleared by a doctor and told McCoy that Plaintiff needed to be taken to an emergency room. (Id.). McCoy refused, saying that Massac County Sheriff Department would not pay for that and that Plaintiff was no longer his problem. (Id. at p. 9). McCoy then left. Jackson County Jail told Plaintiff he was free to go because the warrant was quashed. Plaintiff was then forced to walk over 60 miles to Metropolis, Il. (Id.).

         Discussion

         Based on the allegations of the First Amended Complaint, the Court finds it convenient to divide the pro se action into the following three Counts. The parties and the Court will use these designations in all future pleadings and orders, unless otherwise directed by this Court:

Count 1: Excessive force claim against McCoy for injuring Plaintiff's arm during his arrest.
Count 2: Failure to treat and inadequate medical care claim against McCoy for refusing to obtain medical treatment and take Plaintiff to the hospital for his injured arm.
Count 3: Claim against McCoy for leaving Plaintiff at the Jackson County Jail and thereby forcing him to walk back to Massac County.

         Any claims that are not identified above should be considered dismissed without prejudice as inadequately pled under Twombly.[1]

         Counts 1 and 2

         Because Plaintiff claims he was released on bond from Massac County Jail, it appears that he was a pretrial detainee, rather than a convicted prisoner, at the time of the alleged constitutional violations. Therefore, the objective unreasonableness standard govern Plaintiff's claims regarding excessive force and inadequate medical care. See Kingsley v. Hendrickson, 135 S.Ct. 2466, 2473 (2015); Williams v. Ortiz, 937 F.3d 936, 942 (7th Cir. 2019)(quoting Miranda v. Cty. Lake, 900 F.3d 335, 351 (7th Cir. 2018)).

         Plaintiff's claims that McCoy used excessive force, injuring his arm, and then refused to obtain treatment for Plaintiff's injury. These allegations are ...


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.