United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, Eastern Division
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
CATHERINE D. PERRY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
matter is before the Court upon review of the amended
complaint filed by plaintiff Steven Mullins. Plaintiff is
proceeding herein pro se and in forma
initially commenced this action jointly with another inmate,
purporting to bring claims on behalf of other prisoners.
See Owen v. Lisenbee, No. 4:16-cv-1567-AGF (E.D. Mo.
filed September 30, 2016) (hereafter “Owen v.
Lisenbee”). On October 17, 2016, after noting that
multiple prisoners may not join together in a single lawsuit,
the Owen v. Lisenbee Court struck plaintiff from
that action and opened the instant action as a new civil
case, and plaintiff was given the opportunity to submit an
then filed an amended complaint. Therein, he alleges that the
overcrowding of the Phelps County Jail is unconstitutional
and causes deprivation of basic human needs such as food,
exercise, sufficient and sanitary restroom/shower facilities,
sufficient recreation areas and outside recreation, and also
causes heightened stress and frustration. Plaintiff also
alleges that there is no opportunity to attend religious
services. He seeks declaratory, injunctive, and monetary
relief, and he asks this Court to order his release.
most of the amended complaint, plaintiff once again purports
to bring claims on behalf of others. For example, regarding
his allegations of overcrowded conditions leading to
deprivation of food, plaintiff alleges that during supper on
September 18, 2016 “we” received two meat
sandwiches but only one condiment, and “we” were
informed that condiments were being rationed. (Docket No. 10
at 8). Elsewhere, plaintiff claims that the overcrowded
conditions result in a lack of storage space “for
anyone housed in the pod, ” that the dining facilities
are so crowded that “twenty (20) people must stand to
eat, ” that due to a lack of bunk space “twenty
(20) persons sleep on the floor, ” and that there are
so few toilets that there is a long wait time. (Id.
at 9-10). Plaintiff lacks standing to bring claims alleging
mistreatment of other inmates. Instead, plaintiff must allege
a personal loss. See Martin v. Sargent, 780 F.2d
1334, 1337 (8th Cir. 1985). Further, plaintiff is not an
attorney and is not authorized to assert constitutional
claims on behalf of others. See 28 U.S.C. §
addition, while plaintiff states that the defendants denied
him opportunities to participate in religious services and to
exercise, he provides no details regarding when such
deprivations began or how long they lasted. Finally, while
plaintiff sues the defendants in their individual capacities,
he fails to clearly explain how each defendant is personally
responsible for the alleged constitutional violations.
Instead, plaintiff appears to allege defendants are liable to
him because they held administrative or supervisory
positions. See Martin, 780 F.2d at 1334 (claim not
cognizable under § 1983 where plaintiff fails to allege
the personal responsibility of defendant); Boyd v.
Knox, 47 F.3d 966, 968 (8th Cir. 1995) (respondeat
superior theory inapplicable in § 1983 cases). In
recognition of plaintiff's pro se status, he
will be given the opportunity to submit a second amended
second amended complaint, plaintiff should avoid attempting
to bring claims on behalf of other inmates. Instead, he
should set forth the manner in which he believes the
defendants violated his constitutional rights. In the
“Caption” section of the second amended
complaint, plaintiff should write the first and last name, to
the extent he knows it, of each defendant he wishes to sue.
In the “Statement of Claim” section, plaintiff
should begin by writing the first defendant's name. In
separate, numbered paragraphs under that name, plaintiff
should (1) set forth the allegations supporting his claim or
claims against that defendant, as well as the constitutional
right or rights he claims that defendant is personally
responsible for violating; and (2) state whether the
defendant is being sued in his/her individual capacity or
official capacity. Plaintiff should then proceed in that same
manner for each remaining defendant.
doing, plaintiff must set forth short and plain
statements of his claim or claims, showing that he is
entitled to relief. Plaintiff should not include long
narratives, repetitive assertions, irrelevant material, or
generalized, conclusory statements. Instead, plaintiff should
very specifically set forth the “who, what, when, and
where” of the facts of his claim or claims.
plaintiff's claims must be included in a single complaint
form. Plaintiff must not include exhibits, correspondence, or
is cautioned that the filing of the second amended complaint
completely replaces the amended complaint, and
claims that are not re-alleged are deemed abandoned. See
In re Wireless Telephone Federal Cost Recovery Fees
Litigation, 396 F.3d 922, 928 (8th Cir. 2005).
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff shall, within twenty-one
(21) days of the date of this Order, submit a second amended
complaint in accordance with the instructions set forth
plaintiff fails to timely comply, the Court will dismiss this
action without ...