United States District Court, S.D. Georgia, Augusta Division
MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND
K. EPPS, UNITED STALES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
currently incarcerated at the Burke County Detention Center
(“BCDC”) in Waynesboro, Georgia, commenced the
above-captioned case pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and is
proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis.
Before the Court is Defendants Bush, Huffman, Wilber
Williams, Young, and Haynes' motion to dismiss. (Doc. no.
40.) For the reasons set forth below, the Court
REPORTS and RECOMMENDS
Defendants' motion to dismiss be GRANTED IN
PART and DENIED IN PART.
names as Defendants (1) Alfonzo Williams, Sheriff; (2) John
H. Bush, Major; (3) Chester V. Huffman, Major; (4) Wilbert
Williams, Lieutenant; (5) Stacy Williams, Nurse; (6) Katie
Young, Nurse; and (7) Cassandra Haynes, Captain. (Doc. no.
17, pp. 2-3.) Taking all of Plaintiff's factual
allegations as true, the facts are as follows.
a white male, arrived at BCDC on March 28, 2017.
(Id. at 4.) No one conducted a medical screening,
but Plaintiff requested to see a mental health professional
via the kiosk in BCDC. (Id.) From March 28, 2017
through August 25, 2017, Plaintiff requested to see a mental
health professional more than seventeen times. (Id.)
Each time, Defendant Stacy Williams or Katie Young denied his
request and told him he could not see a mental health
professional. (Id. at 5.) Plaintiff spoke with
Defendants Bush, Huffman, Haynes, and Wilbert Williams about
his inability to obtain mental health treatment, but they did
nothing. (Id. at 6.)
Young and Stacy Williams told Plaintiff he could not receive
mental health treatment because he was a “red
inmate” and thus not allowed outside of BCDC. However,
Plaintiff witnessed three African American inmates who were
also “red” taken out of BCDC for treatment of
pimples, hair bumps, and a jammed finger. (Id. at
August 25, 2017, Defendants sent Plaintiff to Ogeechee Mental
Health for an evaluation, where they prescribed him Elavil
twice a day for his mental health needs. (Id. at 7.)
As a result of Defendants' neglect of his mental health
needs from March 28, 2017 through August 25, 2017, Plaintiff
suffered from emotional distress, depression, anxiety, and
suicidal ideations. (Id. at 5-6.)
Court screened Plaintiff's complaint, dismissing all
claims against Defendant Alonzo Williams and Plaintiff's
official capacity claims against Defendants Bush, Huffman,
Wilbert Williams, and Haynes but allowing to proceed claims
for deliberate indifference to his psychiatric needs and
equal protection against Defendants Bush, Huffman, Wilbert
Williams, Stacy Williams, Young, and Haynes. (Doc. nos. 11,
13.) On May 12, 2016, Defendants Bush, Huffman, Wilber
Williams, Young, and Haynes filed this motion to dismiss all
claims for failure to state a claim because Plaintiff cannot
recover compensatory or punitive damages under the Prison
Litigation Reform Act (“PLRA”). (Doc. no. 16.)
considering a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), the
court tests the legal sufficiency of the complaint, not
whether the plaintiff will ultimately prevail on the merits.
Adinolfe v. United Tech. Corp., 768 F.3d 1161, 1168
(11th Cir. 2014). To avoid dismissal for failure to state a
claim upon which relief can be granted, the allegations in
the complaint must “state a claim to relief that is
plausible on its face.” Bell Atl. Corp. v.
Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007). “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.”
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009). That
is, “[f]actual allegations must be enough to raise a
right to relief above the speculative level.”
Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555. While Rule 8(a) of the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure does not require detailed
factual allegations, “it demands more than an
accusation.” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678. The
complaint is insufficient if it “offers ‘labels
and conclusions' or ‘a formulaic recitation of the
elements of a cause of action, '” or if it
“tenders ‘naked assertions' devoid of
‘further factual enhancement.'” Id.
(quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555, 557). In short,
the complaint must provide a “‘plain
statement' possess[ing] enough heft to ‘sho[w] that
the pleader is entitled to relief.'”
Twombly, 550 U.S. at 557 (quoting Fed.R.Civ.P.
court affords a liberal construction to a pro se
litigant's pleadings, holding them to a more lenient
standard than those drafted by an attorney. Erickson v.
Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007); Haines v.
Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972). However, this liberal
construction does not mean that the court has a duty to
re-write the amended complaint. Snow v. DirecTV,
Inc., 450 F.3d 1314, 1320 (11th Cir. 2006).
Plaintiff's Claims for Compensatory and Punitive ...