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.

Joseph v. Jackson Parish Correctional Center

United States District Court, W.D. Louisiana, Monroe Division

April 10, 2018

LYNDELL JOSEPH
v.
JACKSON PARISH CORRECTIONAL CENTER, ET AL.

         SECTION P

          TERRY A. DOUGHTY JUDGE.

          REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

          KAREN L HAYES, U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         Plaintiff Lyndell Joseph, an inmate at the Jackson Parish Correctional Center, filed the instant pro se and in forma pauperis Complaint on December 18, 2017. Proceeding under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Plaintiff sets forth allegations against Defendants Kevin Kelly and Jackson Parish Correctional Center.

         This 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. For the following reasons, it is recommended that Plaintiff's claims be DENIED AND DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as frivolous and for failing to state a claim for which relief may be granted.

         Background

         Plaintiff alleges that, while in a “lockdown” cell, Defendant Kevin Kelly instructed him to take of his “jumper” so that another individual could “see the marks on [his] back from when . . . Kelly tazed [him] weeks before.” Kelly told him that if he did not take his clothes off he would “taze” him again. Plaintiff alleges further that he took his clothes off and Kelly told him that he had a “nice ass.”

         Plaintiff put his clothes back on and walked with Kelly “to the J dorm” where Kelly “smack[ed]” Plaintiff. After Plaintiff stated that he would report Kelly's actions, Kelly “told the inmates in J dorm [that Plaintiff] was a rat.”

         Plaintiff asks the Court to terminate Kelly's employment and charge Kelly with sexual harassment. Plaintiff seeks $20, 000.00 in damages.

         Law and Analysis

         1. Screening

         Plaintiff is a prisoner who has been permitted to proceed in forma pauperis. As a prisoner seeking redress from an officer or employee of a governmental entity, his complaint is subject to preliminary screening pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. See Martin v. Scott, 156 F.3d 578, 579-80 (5th Cir. 1998) (per curiam). Because he is proceeding in forma pauperis, his complaint is also subject to screening under § 1915(e)(2). Both § 1915(e)(2) (B) and § 1915A(b) provide for sua sponte dismissal of the complaint, or any portion thereof, if the Court finds it is frivolous or malicious, if it fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or if it seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief.

         A complaint is frivolous when it “lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact.” Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989). A claim lacks an arguable basis in law when it is “based on an indisputably meritless legal theory.” Id. at 327. Courts are also afforded the unusual power to pierce the veil of the factual allegations and dismiss those claims whose factual contentions are clearly baseless. Id.

         A complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted when it fails to plead “enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly,550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007); accord Ashcroft v. Iqbal,556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009). Likewise, a complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted if it appears that no relief could be granted under any set of facts that could be proven consistent with the allegations of the complaint. Of course, in making this determination, ...


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.