United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, Eastern Division
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
E. JACKSON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
a prisoner, seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis in this
civil action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Having reviewed
plaintiff's financial information, the Court assesses a
partial initial filing fee of $16.00, which is twenty percent
of his average monthly deposit. See 28 U.S.C. §
1915(b). Additionally, the Court will require plaintiff to
submit an amended complaint.
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), the Court is required to dismiss a
complaint filed in forma pauperis if it is frivolous,
malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief can be
granted. To state a claim for relief, a complaint must plead
more than “legal conclusions” and
“[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of
action [that are] supported by mere conclusory
statements.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662,
678 (2009). A plaintiff must demonstrate a plausible claim
for relief, which is more than a “mere possibility of
misconduct.” Id. at 679. “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. at 678. Determining whether a complaint states a
plausible claim for relief is a context-specific task that
requires the reviewing court to draw on its judicial
experience and common sense. Id. at 679.
reviewing a complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), the
Court accepts the well-pled facts as true. Furthermore, the
Court liberally construes the allegations.
is a prisoner confined in the St. Louis Medium Security
Institution (MSI). In the complaint he describes a litany of
conditions in the facility that are unsanitary and unsafe.
Among other things, plaintiff alleges that he has been bitten
by a brown recluse spider and exposed to black mold which
made him sick. Plaintiff asserts that he has received
insufficient treatment for his medical problems. Plaintiff
also alleges that he burned his hand while working in the
kitchen because of unsafe conditions. According to plaintiff,
the kitchen is condemned, and inmates are served food out of
brings this action against the City of St. Louis; Corizon,
Inc.; Jeffery Carson, Superintendent; Dale Glass,
Commissioner; and C.B.M. Managed Services (C.B.M.) which
allegedly manages the kitchen and food service at MSI.
does not state whether he is suing the defendants in their
official or individual capacities. Where a “complaint
is silent about the capacity in which [plaintiff] is suing
defendant, [a district court must] interpret the complaint as
including only official-capacity claims.” Egerdahl
v. Hibbing Community College, 72 F.3d 615, 619 (8th Cir.
1995); Nix v. Norman, 879 F.2d 429, 431 (8th Cir.
1989). Naming a government official in his or her official
capacity is the equivalent of naming the government entity
that employs the official. Will v. Michigan Dep't of
State Police, 491 U.S. 58, 71 (1989).
state a claim against a municipality or a government official
in his or her official capacity, plaintiff must allege that a
policy or custom of the government entity is responsible for
the alleged constitutional violation. Monell v. Dep't
of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658, 690-91
(1978). The instant complaint does not contain any
allegations that a policy or custom of a government entity
was responsible for the alleged violations of plaintiff's
constitutional rights. As a result, the complaint is
frivolous with respect to the plaintiff's municipal
liability claims against the City of St. Louis and his
official capacity claims against Jeffery Carson and Dale
state a claim for medical mistreatment, plaintiff must plead
facts sufficient to indicate a deliberate indifference to
serious medical needs. Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S.
97, 106 (1976); Camberos v. Branstad, 73 F.3d 174,
175 (8th Cir. 1995). Allegations of mere negligence in giving
or failing to supply medical treatment will not suffice.
Estelle, 429 U.S. at 106. In order to show
deliberate indifference, plaintiff must allege that he
suffered objectively serious medical needs and that
defendants actually knew of but deliberately disregarded
those needs. Dulany v. Carnahan, 132 F.3d 1234, 1239
(8th Cir. 1997). In order to state a claim against Corizon,
plaintiff must allege that there was a policy, custom or
official action that caused an actionable injury. Sanders
v. Sears Roebuck & Co., 984 F.2d 972, 95-76 (8th
Cir. 1993). Plaintiff has not alleged that Corizon's
official policies or customs caused him to be denied medical
care. Therefore, his allegations against Corizon fail to
state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
to hold C.B.M. liable, plaintiff must also allege that its
official policy or custom led to his hand injury.
Id. He has not made any such allegations.
plaintiff is proceeding pro se, the Court will allow him to
file an amended complaint. The amended complaint must be
submitted on a court- provided complaint form. All of the
plaintiff's claims and all defendants being sued must be
set forth in the complaint form. The Court will not search
through supplemental and prior pleadings ...