United States District Court, E.D. Missouri
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
G. FLEISSIG UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
matter is before the Court upon the motion of plaintiff Kevin
Williams, a prisoner, for leave to commence this action
without prepayment of the filing fee. (Docket No. 7). The
Court will grant the motion and assess an initial partial
filing fee of $1.85. In addition, the Court will allow
plaintiff the opportunity to submit an amended complaint.
U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1)
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 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 $10.00, until the
filing fee is fully paid. Id.
case, plaintiff filed a letter with the Court stating that he
could not provide a certified inmate account statement for
the six months immediately preceding the complaint because he
had not been incarcerated that long. (Docket No. 6). In the
instant motion, plaintiff states that he has $9.27 in his
prison account. (Docket No. 7 at 3). Therefore, the Court
will require plaintiff to pay an initial partial filing fee
of $1.85, an amount that is reasonable based upon the
information the Court has about plaintiff's finances.
See Henderson v. Norris, 129 F.3d 481, 484 (8th Cir.
1997) (when a prisoner is unable to provide the Court with a
certified copy of his prison account statement, the Court
should assess an amount “that is reasonable, based on
whatever information the court has about the prisoner's
Standard on Initial Review
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), 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. A pleading that offers “labels
and conclusions” or “a formulaic recitation of
the elements of a cause of action will not do, ” nor
will a complaint suffice if it tenders bare assertions devoid
of “further factual enhancement.” Ashcroft v.
Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Bell
Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)).
conducting initial review pursuant to § 1915(e)(2), the
Court must accept as true the allegations in the complaint,
and must give the complaint the benefit of a liberal
construction. Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520
(1972). However, the tenet that a court must accept the
allegations as true does not apply to legal conclusions,
Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678, and affording a pro
se complaint the benefit of a liberal construction does
not mean that procedural rules in ordinary civil litigation
must be interpreted so as to excuse mistakes by those who
proceed without counsel. See McNeil v. U.S., 508
U.S. 106, 113 (1993). Even pro se complaints are
required to allege facts which, if true, state a claim for
relief as a matter of law. Martin v. Aubuchon, 623
F.2d 1282, 1286 (8th Cir. 1980); see also Stone v.
Harry, 364 F.3d 912, 914-15 (8th Cir. 2004) (federal
courts are not required to “assume facts that are not
alleged, just because an additional factual allegation would
have formed a stronger complaint”).
brings this action to redress violations of his civil rights,
and names the Saint Charles County Jail as defendant.
Plaintiff alleges that he is being fed peanut butter even
though he is allergic to it, and is also being fed food that
fails to comport with his cardiac diet. He also states that
he is being denied medical care, and that he has suffered a
complaint is legally frivolous because the St. Charles County
Jail is not an entity that is subject to a suit such as the
one at bar. See Ketchum v. City of West Memphis,
Ark., 974 F.2d 81, 82 (8th Cir. 1992) (departments or
subdivisions of local government are “not juridical
entities suable as such.”). In addition, the complaint
is defective because it was not drafted on the Court's
form. See E.D. Mo. Local Rule 2.06(A).
plaintiff is proceeding pro se, the Court will allow
him to file an amended complaint. Plaintiff is warned that
the filing of an amended complaint replaces the original
complaint, and so it must include all claims plaintiff wishes
to bring. E.g., In re Wireless Telephone Federal
Cost Recovery Fees Litigation, 396 F.3d 922, 928 (8th
Cir. 2005). Plaintiff must submit the amended complaint on a
court-provided form, and the amended complaint must comply
with Rules 8 and 10 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
“Caption” section of the amended complaint,
plaintiff must state the first and last name, to the extent
he knows it, of each defendant he wishes to sue. Plaintiff
should also indicate whether he intends to sue each defendant
in his or her individual capacity, official capacity, or
“Statement of Claim” section, plaintiff should
begin by writing the first defendant's name. In separate,
numbered paragraphs under that name, plaintiff should set
forth the specific factual allegations supporting his claim
or claims against that defendant, as well as the
constitutional right or rights that defendant violated.
Plaintiff should only include claims that arise out of the
same transaction or occurrence, or simply put, claims that
are related to each other. See Fed. R. Civ. P.