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.

Proby v. Corizon Medical Services

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

September 12, 2019

GEORGE PROBY, JR., Plaintiff,
v.
CORIZON MEDICAL SERVICES, et. al., Defendants.

          MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

          STEPHEN N. LIMBAUGH UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

         This matter is before the Court upon the motions of George Proby, Jr. (registration no. 1237464), an inmate at Northeast Correctional Center ("NECC"), for leave to commence this action without payment of the required filing fee.[1] For the reasons stated below, the Court finds that plaintiff does not have sufficient funds to pay the entire filing fee and will assess an initial partial filing fee of $1.S3. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). Furthermore, after reviewing the complaint, the Court will order plaintiff to submit a second amended complaint on a court-provided form in compliance with the instructions set forth below. Plaintiffs failure to do so will result in a dismissal of this action, without prejudice.

         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.

         Plaintiff has submitted an affidavit and a certified copy of his prison account statement for the six-month period immediately preceding the submission of his complaint. A review of plaintiffs account indicates an average monthly deposit of $9.18. Accordingly, the Court will assess an initial partial filing fee of $1.83.

         Legal Standard on Initial Review

         Under 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 679.

         Pro se 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).

         Background

         Plaintiff filed this action in the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri (W.D.M.O.) on December 6, 2018. At the time he filed his sixty-two-page (62) complaint, he was incarcerated in the Southeast Correctional Center ("SECC") in Charleston, Missouri.[2] The W.D.M.O. transferred the action to this Court on December 11, 2018, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a).[3] Along with the complaint, the Court simultaneously transferred plaintiffs motions for temporary restraining order and for preliminary injunction, also filed on December 6, 2018[4], in which plaintiff sought "timely and proper medical treatment."

         Plaintiff filed his amended complaint on May 20, 2019, in this Court. "It is well-established that an amended complaint supersedes an original complaint and renders the original complaint without legal effect." In re Wireless Telephone Federal Cost Recovery Fees Litigation, 396 F.3d 922, 928 (8th Cir. 2005).

         Plaintiff is currently incarcerated at Northeast Correctional Center ("NECC"). The amended pleading is made up eighty-six-pages (86) pages, including exhibits. It names thirty-three (33) individuals and entities as defendants in this action, and plaintiff has included claims relating to three separate prisons - Moberly Correctional Center ("MCC"), Southeast Correctional Center ("SECC"), and Jefferson City Correctional Center ("JECC"). Plaintiff has also included claims relating to supervisors at Corizon Health Services and the individuals who run the Missouri Department of Corrections, who are located in Jefferson City, Missouri. Moreover, he has brought more than twelve (12) separate claims against the thirty-three (33) defendants. As set forth in detail below, such pleading practice is not allowed pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 8, 10, 18 and 20, and plaintiff will be required to amend his complaint.

         The Amended Complaint[5]

         Plaintiff brings this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Defendants are individuals employed by Jefferson City Correctional Center ("JCCC"), the Moberly Correctional Center ("MCC"), the Southeast Correctional Center ("SECC"), Corizon Medical Services ("Corizon), and the Missouri Department of Corrections ("MDOC").

         Named as defendants are: Corizon Medical Services; T. Bredeman (MDOC, Director of Operations); J. Cofield (MDOC, Director of Operations of Constituent Services); Dean Minor (Warden, MCC); Ruanne Stamps (Doctor, MCC); Bonnie Boley (Health Services Admin., MCC); Laurel Davison (Nurse Practitioner, MCC); Audrey Ford (Nurse, MCC); Kayla Nivert (Nurse, MCC); Amanda Unknown (Nurse, MCC); Unknown Stoner (Nurse, MCC); Christina Unknown (Nurse, MCC); Courtney Unknown (Nurse, MCC); Unknown Lawson (Square Cook, MCC); Unknown Jochem (Square Cook, MCC); Unknown Bell (Square Cook, MCC); Molly Leija (Health Services Admin., SECC); Martin Unknown (Case Worker, MCC); Aaron LeGrand (Case Worker, MCC); Blake Moutray (Correctional Officer, MCC); Ralph Vanlandringham (Correctional Officer, MCC); Phillip Tippen (Doctor, SECC); Rebecca Graham (Nurse Practitioner, SECC); Larry Graham (Charge Nurse, SECC); Christy Williams (Nurse, SECC); Megan Unknown (Nurse, SECC); Jackie Unknown (Nurse, SECC); Amanda Unknown (Nurse, SECC); Unknown Lynch (Correctional Officer, SECC); Unknown Harriston (Correctional Officer, SECC); Sydney Serr (Nurse Practitioner, JECC); and Ryan Crews (Dep. Div. Dir. Of Adult Inst., MDOC). Plaintiff brings this action against defendants in their individual and official capacities.

         Plaintiff asserts a plethora of medical claims against defendants including assertions regarding alleged injuries from: (1) falling down the stairs; (2) head injuries/concussion; (3) severe headaches; (4) spotted vision; (5) double vision; (6) neck injuries; (7) swollen/sprain-like muscle cramps in neck and unable to rotate neck without clicking sound; (8) back injuries in lumbar region/sciatic nerve problems; (9) side effects from Effexor and Cymbalta[6]; (10) side effects from experimental blood pressure medications;[7] (11) injuries from refusing to give proper blood pressure medication without severe side effects[8]; and (12) denial of prescribed eye glasses[9].

         Plaintiff seeks specific injunctive relief as well as compensatory and punitive damages in this action. Some of plaintiff s requests for injunctive relief are specific to SECC, and he no longer resides at this prison. When a prisoner has been transferred to a new correctional facility, his claims for injunctive and declaratory relief are properly ...


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.