United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin
DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION
FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED WITHOUT PREPAYMENT OF THE FILING FEE
(DKT. NO. 2) AND DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO FILE AN AMENDED
COMPLAINT ON OR BEFORE JULY 27, 2018
PAMELA PEPPER UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
plaintiff, Johnnie Ames, was an inmate at the Kenosha County
Detention Center when he filed a complaint under 42 U.S.C.
§1983, dkt. no. 1, along with a motion for leave to
proceed without prepayment of the filing fee, dkt. no. 2. He
since has been released.
Motion for Leave to Proceed without Prepayment of the Filing
Fee (Dkt. No. 2)
Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA) applies to this case
because the plaintiff was incarcerated when he filed his
complaint. 28 U.S.C. §1915. The PLRA provides that a
court may allow an incarcerated plaintiff to proceed with his
lawsuit without prepaying the case filing fee, as long as he
meets certain conditions. One of those conditions is that the
plaintiff must pay an initial partial filing fee. 28 U.S.C.
March 30, 2017, the court ordered the plaintiff to pay an
initial partial filing fee of $11.50. Dkt. No. 5. The court
received the fee on May 5, 2017. Accordingly, the court will
grant the plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed without
prepayment of the filing fee. The court will require the
plaintiff to pay the remainder of the filing fee over time as
set forth at the end of this decision.
Screening the Plaintiff's Complaint
Standard for Screening Complaints
requires the court to screen complaints brought by prisoners
seeking relief against a governmental entity or officer or
employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. §1915A(a).
The court must dismiss a complaint if the plaintiff raises
claims that are legally “frivolous or malicious,
” that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be
granted, or that seek monetary relief from a defendant who is
immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. §1915A(b).
state a cognizable claim under the federal notice pleading
system, the plaintiff is required to provide a “short
and plain statement of the claim showing that [he] is
entitled to relief[.]” Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2). It is not
necessary for the plaintiff to plead specific facts, and his
statement need only “give the defendant fair notice of
what the . . . claim is and the grounds upon which it
rests.” Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550
U.S. 544, 555 (2007) (quoting Conley v. Gibson, 355
U.S. 41, 47 (1957)). A complaint that offers mere
“labels and conclusions, ” howeer, or a
“formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of
action will not do.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556
U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at
555). To state a claim, a complaint must contain sufficient
factual matter, accepted as true, “that is plausible on
its face.” Id. (quoting Twombly, 550
U.S. at 570). “A claim has facial plausibility when the
plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to
draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable
for the misconduct alleged.” Id. (citing
Twombly, 550 U.S. at 556). The complaint's
allegations “must be enough to raise a right to relief
above the speculative level.” Twombly, 550
U.S. at 555 (citation omitted).
state a claim that his civil rights were violated under 42
U.S.C. §1983, a plaintiff must allege that: 1) he was
deprived of a right secured by the Constitution or laws of
the United States; and 2) the deprivation was visited upon
him by a person or persons acting under color of state law.
Buchanan-Moore v. Cty. of Milwaukee, 570 F.3d 824,
827 (7th Cir. 2009) (citing Kramer v. Vill. of N. Fond du
Lac, 384 F.3d 856, 861 (7th Cir. 2004)); see also
Gomez v. Toledo, 446 U.S. 635, 640 (1980). The court is
obliged to give the plaintiff's pro se
allegations, “however inartfully pleaded, ” a
liberal construction. See Erickson v. Pardus, 551
U.S. 89, 94 (2007) (quoting Estelle v. Gamble, 429
U.S. 97, 106 (1976)).
Facts Alleged in the Complaint
plaintiff alleges that on November 4, 2016, he was taken into
custody. Dkt. No. 1 at 2. While in custody, he was seen by
the Kenosha County Detention Center medical staff, who asked
the plaintiff about his medical needs and what pharmacy he
used. Id. The plaintiff provided that information to
the nurse practitioner. On November 9, 2016, the plaintiff
asked the nursing staff how he would receive his medications.
November 14, 2016, the plaintiff submitted a medical request
asking to receive his medication for his blood pressure,
neuropathy, aneurysms, and high cholesterol. Id. The
next day, the plaintiff submitted another medical request
because he was having problems going to the bathroom.
Id. at 2-3. Three days after that, the plaintiff
submitted a medical request asking to see the doctor about
getting his medications. Id. at 3.
plaintiff describes an interaction with a nurse during sick
call on November 21, 2016. Id. When the plaintiff
asked the nurse for her name, she replied,
“Nurse.” Id. She had her name tag on
backward. Id. The nurse practitioner ...