United States District Court, W.D. Louisiana, Lake Charles Division
MELVIN BRADLEY BOUTTE B.O.P. # 13611-035
KEITH COOLEY, ET AL
KATHLEEK KAY, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
the court is the civil rights action filed in forma
pauperis by pro se plaintiff Melvin Bradley
Boutte (“Boutte”). Boutte is an inmate in the
custody of the Federal Bureau of Prisons and is incarcerated
at FCI-Forrest City Low in Forrest City, Arkansas. However,
he complains of events that occurred while he was
incarcerated at FCI-Oakdale (“FCIO”) in Oakdale,
Louisiana. As defendants, he names FCIO Warden Becky Clay;
FCIO Lieutenants Morgan and DeVille; FCIO officers M.
Bergeron, R. Smith, Teddy Desholel, and K. Clostner; Nurse
Perkins; and Counselor Odom.
matter has been referred to the undersigned for review,
report, and recommendation in accordance with the provisions
of 28 U.S.C. § 636 and the standing orders of the court.
states that on November 11, 2014, he was cleaning up in the
inner east serving line in food services when one of his
coworkers retrieved scalding water from the back cooking area
in order to clean the floor. Doc. 1, att. 2, p. 3. Boutte
claims that the coworker dumped the hot water under the
serving line, which went into his boot and caused burns to
his leg and foot. Id. Boutte states that he was
“hollering and rushing to take [his] boot and sock
off.” Id. He claims that a co-worker brought a
bucket of cold water for him to put his foot in and then the
coworker told FCIO officer Bergeron about Boutte's
injury. Id. Bergeron looked at Boutte's foot and
called medical to inform them that Boutte was on his way
there. Id. at 3-4. Boutte states that he walked to
the nurse's station where he was treated by Nurse
Perkins. Id. at 4. He claims that his foot looked
worse the next day and that Dr. Galante diagnosed him with
second degree burns and prescribed pain medication.
time of the incident, Boutte alleges that defendant Bergeron
was in charge of the serving line and defendant Smith was in
charge of the back cooking area. Id. at 3. Boutte
contends that Bergeron and Lt. Morgan were talking when the
accident occurred and that his injuries resulted from the
lack of supervision in the kitchen serving area. Id.
at 2-4. In his administrative remedy filings he alleged that
Smith, Bergeron, and Morgan were inattentive to their jobs,
failed to observe safety precautions, and failed to file an
incident report and/or report the incident to the safety
department. Id. at 26-28, 59-61, 63-64, 70-73.
Boutte contends that had Smith, Bergeron, and Morgan been
paying attention to their jobs, they would have stopped the
other inmate from retrieving the hot water and throwing it on
the floor as such actions are in violation of safety
protocol. Id. Boutte's claims about the alleged
failure to file a report appear to be that had a report been
filed, the safety department would have taken pictures of his
injuries. E.g., id. at 28. Boutte further
states that Morgan is an operations lieutenant and that it
was Morgan's job to make sure that Bergeron and Smith
supervised the inmate workers to ensure that the inmates
followed all safety protocols. Id. at 64. As to
Nurse Perkins, Boutte contends that she, too, failed to file
an incident report and/or report the incident to the safety
department, resulting in the safety department failing to
take photographs of his injuries. Id. at 46.
relief for the above, Boutte seeks $740, 000.00 for
unspecified damages. Doc. 1, p. 4.
has been granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis
under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. This act directs a district
court to dismiss an action if the court determines that it is
frivolous or malicious or fails to state a claim on which
relief may be granted. Bradley v. Puckett, 157 F.3d
1022, 1025 (5th Cir. 1998) (citing 28 U.S.C. §
1915(e)(2)(B)(i) and (ii)).
complaint is frivolous if it lacks an arguable basis in law
or fact. Gonzalez v. Wyatt, 157 F.3d 1016, 1019 (5th
Cir. 1998). A complaint fails to state a claim upon which
relief may be granted if it is clear the plaintiff cannot
prove any set of facts in support of his claim that would
entitle him to relief. Doe v. Dallas Indep. Sch.
Dist., 153 F.3d 211, 215 (5th Cir. 1998). When
determining whether a complaint is frivolous or fails to
state a claim upon which relief may be granted, the court
must accept plaintiff's allegations as true. Horton
v. Cockrell, 70 F.3d 397, 400 (5th Cir. 1995)
(frivolity); Bradley v. Puckett, 157 F.3d at 1025
(failure to state a claim).