United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, Eastern Division
OPINION, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
HENRY EDWARD AUTREY, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court upon the motion of George Proby, Jr. (registration no. 1237464), an inmate at Jefferson County Correctional Center, for leave to commence this action without payment of the required filing fee. For the reasons stated below, the Court finds that plaintiff does not have sufficient funds to pay the entire filing fee and will assess an initial partial filing fee of $37.60. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). Furthermore, after reviewing the complaint, the Court will order the Clerk to issue process or cause process to be issued on the complaint.
28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1)
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1), a prisoner bringing a civil action in forma pauperis is required to pay the full amount of the filing fee. If the prisoner has insufficient funds in his or her prison account to pay the entire fee, the Court must assess and, when funds exist, collect an initial partial filing fee of 20 percent of the greater of (1) the average monthly deposits in the prisoner's account, or (2) the average monthly balance in the prisoner's account for the prior six-month period. After payment of the initial partial filing fee, the prisoner is required to make monthly payments of 20 percent of the preceding month's income credited to the prisoner's account. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2). The agency having custody of the prisoner will forward these monthly payments to the Clerk of Court each time the amount in the prisoner's account exceeds $10, until the filing fee is fully paid. Id.
Plaintiff has submitted an affidavit and a certified copy of his prison account statement for the six-month period immediately preceding the submission of his complaint. A review of plaintiff's account indicates an average monthly deposit of $30.00, and an average monthly balance of $188.00. Plaintiff has insufficient funds to pay the entire filing fee. Accordingly, the Court will assess an initial partial filing fee of $37.60, which is 20 percent of plaintiff's average monthly balance.
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), the Court may dismiss a complaint filed in forma pauperis if the action is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief. An action is frivolous if "it lacks an arguable basis in either law or in fact." Neitzke v. Williams , 490 U.S. 319, 328 (1989). 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 , 127 S.Ct. 1955, 1974 (2007).
In reviewing a pro se complaint under § 1915(e)(2)(B), the Court must give the complaint the benefit of a liberal construction. Haines v. Kerner , 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972). The Court must also weigh all factual allegations in favor of the plaintiff, unless the facts alleged are clearly baseless. Denton v. Hernandez , 504 U.S. 25, 32-33 (1992); Scheuer v. Rhodes , 416 U.S. 232, 236 (1974).
Plaintiff brings this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Defendants are officials of St. Francois County, the State of Missouri, the Missouri Department of Corrections, and Corizon, Inc. Plaintiff alleges that the defendants assaulted him and also denied him medical care both for the injuries he sustained in the assault and for his high blood pressure. Plaintiff also alleges that his public defender had him placed in a dangerous facility in order to induce a guilty plea.
After carefully reviewing the complaint, the Court finds that plaintiff's claims against the named defendants in their individual capacities survive review under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). As a result, the Court will direct the Clerk to serve process on the defendants.
Plaintiff's claims against defendants in their official capacities do not state a claim for relief. Plaintiff has not alleged that a policy or custom of St. Francois County or Corizon led to his injuries. And plaintiff's claims against the state employees are barred by the Eleventh Amendment. As a result, the Court will dismiss plaintiff's official-capacity claims.
In general, fictitious parties may not be named as defendants in a civil action. Phelps v. United States , 15 F.3d 735, 739 (8th Cir. 1994). An action may proceed against a party whose name is unknown, however, if the complaint makes sufficiently specific allegations to permit the identity of the party to be ascertained after reasonable discovery. Munz v. Parr , 758 F.2d 1254, 1257 (8th Cir. 1985). Plaintiff's claims against "St. Francois County Jail Administrator" do not provide specific allegations permitting the ...