United States District Court, S.D. Georgia, Augusta Division
TAVARRES J. HENDERSON, Plaintiff,
ROBERT LEVERETT, Major, Individual Capacity; OFFICER FNU MATHIS, Individual Capacity; and SGT. FNU BARBER, Individual Capacity, Defendants.
K. EPPS UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
a pretrial detainee at Charles B. Webster Detention Center in
Augusta, Georgia, brought the above-captioned case pursuant
to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 regarding events alleged to have
occurred at Charles B. Webster Detention Center in Augusta,
Georgia. Because he is proceeding in forma pauperis
(“IFP”), Plaintiff's complaint must be
screened to protect potential defendants. Phillips v.
Mashburn, 746 F.2d 782, 785 (11th Cir. 1984);
Al-Amin v. Donald, 165 F. App'x 733, 736 (11th
COMPLAINT ALLEGATIONS AND ANALYSIS
names as Defendants: (1) Major Robert Leverett, (2) Officer
Mathis, and (3) Sergeant Barber. (Doc. no. 1, p. 1.) Taking
all of Plaintiff's factual allegations as true, as the
Court must for purposes of the present screening, the facts
are as follows.
25, 2017, Plaintiff was sent to F-F Block and remained there
for five months under protective custody. (Doc. no. 1, p. 5.)
Plaintiff had no telephone access, visitation, hygiene
supplies, or envelopes. (Id.) Plaintiff “had
to sell his lunch tray's [sic] to other inmates for
stamped envelopes in order to write his lawyer.”
(Id.) On July 8, 2017, Plaintiff informed Major
Leverett, the alleged head of the detention center, about
these conditions, and Major Leverett told Plaintiff the
problems would be addressed but they were not. (Id.)
Plaintiff filed grievances on July 5, 2017, July 17, 2017,
and August 2, 2017. (Id.) The grievances were denied
on August 2, 2017, and Plaintiff filed an appeal on August 3,
2017. (Id.) Plaintiff did not receive a response to
his grievance appeal. (Id.)
October 13, 2017, Plaintiff met with Sergeant Barber, who
informed Plaintiff he was being moved to a new protective
custody block and asked Plaintiff to sign a release form.
(Id.) Plaintiff was transferred to G-F block.
(Id.) Within ten minutes of being placed in his new
cell, five inmates “had officer's [sic] to pop open
his door, ” attacked Plaintiff, and forced him to
“write and sign a[n] affidavit to free Plaintiff's
co-defendant of his current charges.” (Id. at
6.) Plaintiff informed the officers on duty of the attack and
“was ignored.” (Id.)
October 18, 2017, Plaintiff received a care package.
(Id.) When Plaintiff returned to his cell with the
care package, three inmates held a knife to his throat and
forced Plaintiff to give them the care package and a radio.
(Id.) Plaintiff informed Officer Mathis of the
attack and requested to be sent to protective custody, but
Officer Mathis ignored Plaintiff. (Id.) Officers
found the knife on October 24, 2017. (Id.) Plaintiff
was sent back to F-F block and filed a grievance on November
6, 2017. (Id.) On November 16, 2017, prison
officials denied the grievance. (Id.) On November
17, 2017, Plaintiff appealed the denial but did not receive a
construing Plaintiff's allegations in his favor and
granting him the benefit of all reasonable inferences to be
derived from the facts alleged, the Court finds Plaintiff has
arguably states viable claims against Major Leverett
based on the deprivation of Plaintiff's visitation
access, hygiene products, stamps and envelopes, and telephone
access. Al-Amin v. Smith, 511 F.3d 1317, 1332-34
(11th Cir. 2008); Pope v. Hightower, 101 F.3d 1382,
1385 (11th Cir. 1996). In a companion Report and
Recommendation, the Court recommends dismissal of
Plaintiff's deliberate indifference and denial of access
to the courts claims and Defendants Barber and Mathis.
IS HEREBY ORDERED that service of process shall be
effected on Defendant Leverett. The United States Marshal
shall mail a copy of the complaint (doc. no. 1) and this
Order by first-class mail and request that the defendant
waives formal service of the summons. Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(d).
Individual defendants have a duty to avoid unnecessary costs
of serving the summons, and if a defendant fails to comply
with the request for waiver, the defendant must bear the
costs of personal service unless good cause can be shown for
failure to return the waiver. Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(d)(2). A
defendant whose return of the waiver is timely does not have
to answer the complaint until sixty days after the date the
Marshal mails the request for waiver. Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(d)(3).
However, service must be effected within 90 days of the date
of this Order, and the failure to do so may result in the
dismissal of any unserved defendant or the entire case.
Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(m). Plaintiff is responsible for providing
sufficient information for the Marshal to identify and locate
the defendant to effect service.
IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall serve upon
the defendant, or upon his defense attorney if appearance has
been entered by counsel, a copy of every further pleading or
other document submitted to the Court. Plaintiff shall
include with the papers to be filed a certificate stating the
date a true and correct copy of any document was mailed to
the defendant or his counsel. Fed.R.Civ.P. 5; Loc. R. 5.1.
Every pleading shall contain a caption setting forth the name
of the court, the title of the action, and the file number.
Fed.R.Civ.P. 10(a). Any paper received by a District Judge or
Magistrate Judge that has not been properly filed with the
Clerk of Court or that fails to include a caption or
certificate of service will be returned.
Plaintiff's duty to cooperate fully in any discovery that
may be initiated by the defendant. Upon being given at least
five days notice of the scheduled deposition date, Plaintiff
shall appear and permit his deposition to be taken and shall
answer, under oath and solemn affirmation, any question that
seeks information relevant to the subject matter of the
pending action. Failing to answer questions at the deposition
or giving evasive or incomplete responses to questions will
not be tolerated and may subject Plaintiff to severe
sanctions, including dismissal of this case. The
defendant shall ensure that Plaintiff's deposition and
any other depositions in the case are taken within the
140-day discovery period allowed by this Court's
this action is pending, Plaintiff shall immediately inform
this Court and opposing counsel of any change of address.
Failure to do so will result in dismissal of this case.
must pursue this case; if Plaintiff does not press the case
forward, the Court may dismiss it for want of prosecution.
Fed.R.Civ.P. 41; Loc. R. 41.1. If Plaintiff wishes to obtain
facts and information about the case from the defendant,
Plaintiff must initiate discovery. Seegenerally Fed.R.Civ.P. 26 through 37 (containing the
rules governing discovery and providing for the basic methods
of discovery). Plaintiff should begin discovery promptly and