United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, Eastern Division
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
L. WHITE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
matter is before the Court on the motion of plaintiff Dennis
Laramore for leave to commence this civil action without
prepayment of the required filing fee. Also before the Court
is plaintiffs complaint and plaintiffs supplemental
complaints. Having reviewed the motion to proceed in forma
pauperis and the financial information submitted in support
of the motion, the Court will grant the motion to proceed in
forma pauperis, and assess an initial partial filing fee of
$32.45. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(4).
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.
has submitted his account statement showing his deposits from
the past four months prior to the filing of the present
action. The Court will assess an initial partial filing fee
of $32.45, which calculates to 20% of the average monthly
deposits in his prison account for the four-month
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. To state a claim for relief under § 1983, 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, inter alia, draw
upon judicial experience and common sense. Id. at
complaints are to be liberally construed. Estelle v.
Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 106 (1976). However, they still
must allege sufficient facts to support the claims alleged.
Stone v. Harry, 364 F.3d 912, 914-15 (8th Cir.
2004); see also Martin v. Aubuchon, 623 F.2d 1282,
1286 (8th Cir. 1980) (even pro se complaints are required to
allege facts which, if true, state a claim for relief as a
matter of law). Federal courts are not required to
"assume facts that are not alleged, just because an
additional factual allegation would have formed a stronger
complaint." Stone, 364 F.3d at 914-15. In
addition, giving 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).
is currently an inmate at the Potosi Correctional Center
("PCC"). He brings this action pursuant to 42
U.S.C. § 1983 against Zach Jacobsen (Sheriff, Washington
County Jail), Steven L. Rion (Chief of Custody at the Jail),
Kevin Snow (Deputy, Washington County Jail), and Cody Brinley
(Washington County Commissioner). He sues all defendants in
their individual and official capacities.
claims about the conditions of confinement at the Washington
County Jail, as well as about defendants' deliberate
indifference to several of his medical needs during his stay
at the Jail. For example, he asserts that there is black mold
at the Jail, and he claims that the floor is slick in the
showers at the Jail and the handicap rails lack
"improvements" in the shower stalls. Plaintiff also
alleges, in his supplemental pleadings there are problems
with a "locking system" in the Jail, and
additionally, the Jail is overcrowded.
regards to his medical needs, plaintiff claims that he
suffers from asthma, a heart condition, and a broken tooth,
and that none of these medical needs have been seen to since
he has been incarcerated at the Jail. Plaintiff also
complains that he fell while getting out of the shower and he
was not taken for x-rays or to the hospital, despite losing
sight in one eye and seriously injuring his back and neck and
head. Plaintiff asserts that he was merely given aspirin for
his injuries and told that the Jail would not transport
inmates to the doctor or hospital.
plaintiff asserts that his asthma and heart condition have
worsened as a result of the black mold and that he has not