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.

Edwards v. CBM Managed Services

United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, Eastern Division

November 29, 2017

RISHARD L.A. EDWARDS, Plaintiff,
v.
CBM MANAGED SERVICES, Defendant.

          MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

          JEAN C. HAMILTON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         This matter is before the Court upon the motion of plaintiff Rishard Edwards (registration no. 145280), a pretrial detainee at St. Louis City Justice Center, for leave to commence this action without payment of the required filing fee. For the reasons stated below, the Court finds that the plaintiff does not have sufficient funds to pay the entire filing fee and will assess an initial partial filing fee of $1.00.[1] See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). Furthermore, after reviewing the complaint, the Court will partially dismiss the complaint and will order the Clerk to issue process or cause process to be issued on the non-frivolous portions of 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.

         As plaintiff has failed to submit a prisoner account statement, the Court will charge an initial partial filing fee of $1.00 at this time. See Henderson v. Norris, 129 F.3d 481, 484 (8th Cir. 1997).

         28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)

         Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), the Court must 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 from a defendant who is immune from such relief. An action is frivolous if it Alacks an arguable basis in either law or fact.@ Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 328 (1989); Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 31 (1992). An action is malicious if it is undertaken for the purpose of harassing the named defendants and not for the purpose of vindicating a cognizable right. Spencer v. Rhodes, 656 F.Supp. 458, 461-63 (E.D. N.C. 1987), aff=d 826 F.2d 1059 (4th Cir. 1987). A complaint fails to state a claim if it does not plead Aenough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.@ Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007).

         The Complaint

         Plaintiff, a pretrial detainee at the St. Louis City Justice Center, brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging violations of his civil rights. Named as the sole defendant in this action is the food service provider at the Justice Center, CBM Managed Services (a/k/a “Catering by Marlin's, Inc.” or “CBM”). Plaintiff brings his claim against defendant in its individual and official capacities.

         Plaintiff claims that CBM has a policy and practice of failing to provide adequate nutrition to the inmates at the St. Louis City Justice Center. Specifically, plaintiff claims that CBM has been depriving the inmates of fruit in their daily meals. Plaintiff seeks compensatory damages and injunctive relief in this action.

         Discussion

         Plaintiff's official capacity claims arise under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments as an unconstitutional condition of confinement claim. Prisoners in the past have raised claims related to food deprivation and deficiency under these constitutional rights. See Rust v. Grammer, 858 F.2d 411 (8th Cir. 1988); Phelps v. Kapnolas, 123 F.3d 91 (2d Cir.1997); Cooper v. Sheriff, Lubbock County, Texas, 929 F.2d 1078 (5th Cir.1991); Freeman v. Trudell, 497 F.Supp. 481 (E.D.Mich.1980). Thus, the Court will issue process on these claims for relief against defendant in its official capacity.[2]

         However, plaintiff's individual capacity claims against CBM are subject to dismissal, as plaintiff cannot bring an individual capacity claim against this quasi-government entity.

         Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma ...


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.