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.

Carr v. Derus

United States District Court, W.D. Wisconsin

June 15, 2018

ARQUINCY L. CARR, Plaintiff,
v.
MELINDA DERUS, RANDY SCOTT, APRIL FUMOY, CHRIS BUESGEN, and LIZZIE TEGELS, Defendants.

          OPINION AND ORDER

          WILLIAM M. CONLEY DISTRICT JUDGE

         Pro se plaintiff ArQuincy L. Carr contends that prison staff at the Jackson Correctional Institution violated his constitutional rights in various ways. Because Carr is incarcerated, his complaint must be screened under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. While Carr filed multiple exhibits and an amended complaint, most recently he filed a second amended complaint that he explains should be the operative pleading for purposes of screening. (Dkts. ##19, 20.) He has also filed a motion to strike the exhibits he previously submitted. (Dkt. #18.) These motions are granted, but after reviewing the second amended complaint, the court concludes that Carr may not proceed on any of his claims at this time. While several of his claims must be dismissed as meritless, Carr will be permitted to file a third amended complaint that clarifies his remaining claims. For the reasons discussed below, Carr's motion regarding ongoing retaliation (dkt. #11) will also be denied.

         ALLEGATIONS OF FACT[1]

At all times relevant to his complaint, plaintiff ArQuincy Carr was confined at the Jackson Correctional Institution (“JCI”), where all of the named defendants are also employed.[2] Defendant Lizzie Tegels is the warden; Melinda Derus is a unit manager; Dunahay is a captain; and John Doe is a correctional officer.

         A. Complaint about Flies

         On or about September 23, 2015, plaintiff wrote to defendant Derus complaining about flies in the dorm area where he was housed. Derus allegedly ignored his request, so he filed an inmate complaint, which was unsuccessful. Defendant Tegels as warden also wrote to Carr, stating (1) she supported dismissal of his inmate complaint and (2) the best way to address the fly situation was to keep the doors closed.

         B. Access to Programming

         Unit Manager Derus is the facilitator of programming at JCI. Carr requested access to T4C, but Derus denied his request, informing Carr that he did not have a need for that program. Carr showed his social worker Derus's response, and his social worker informed Derus that Carr had a need for T4C, but Derus persisted in denying Carr entry. Carr again filed a complaint, but ICE dismissed it on the ground that his entry into programming was based on his estimated release date.

         C. Ramadan meals

         Carr is a Muslim and informed defendant Dunahay in writing that he was not receiving his Ramadan meals in a timely fashion. Carr explains that receiving the meals in a timely fashion is necessary to ensure that he can eat, wash, and brush his teeth prior to the mandated prayer time. Carr states that despite informing Dunahay of his need for a timely meal, defendant John Doe still brought the meals at the wrong time.

         D. Transfer

         On July 28, 2015, Dunahay and Derus requested Carr's transfer from JCI to WSPF. Carr claims that this transfer was in retaliation for his grievances.

         OPINION

         Plaintiff seeks to bring constitutional claims against defendants based on his allegations concerning: (1) flies in the prison; (2) inability to access treatment programs; and (3) the timing of Ramadan meals. As discussed below, however, ...


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.