United States District Court, S.D. Georgia, Dublin Division
DARRELL D. KILLENS, Plaintiff,
SHERIFF CHRIS STEVENSON; LT. FNU MOON; OFC. 1; OFC. 2; OFC. 3; and OFC. 4, Defendants.
MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND
K. EFPS, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
a pretrial detainee at Laurens County Jail in Dublin,
Georgia, brought the above-captioned case pursuant to 42
U.S.C. § 1983 regarding events alleged to have occurred
at Telfair County Jail in McRae, 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
Fed.Appx. 733, 736 (11th Cir. 2006) (per curiam).
SCREENING OF THE COMPLAINT
names as Defendants: (1) Sheriff Chris Stevenson; (2)
Lieutenant FNU Moon; and (3) OFC. #1-4. (Doc. no. 1, pp. 1,
4.) Taking all of Plaintiff's factual allegations as
true, as the Court must for purposes of the present
screening, the facts are as follows.
was detained at Telfair County Jail from March 7 to March 12,
2019. (Id. at 6.) On March 7, 2019, Plaintiff
complained to one of the jail officers on duty, who had no
professional medical training, about his blood pressure and
an open wound on his finger. (Id. at 5.) The officer
measured Plaintiff s blood pressure to be 175/160.
(Id.) Plaintiff received no medical treatment at the
time. Additionally, Plaintiffs head was hurting, and his feet
were swollen. (Id.) Plaintiff continued to complain
over the next couple of days to Jane and John Doe officers,
Defendants OFC. #1-4, stating his blood pressure was above
normal, he was at a high risk of stroke, and he had severe
headaches and foot swelling. (Id.) Plaintiff alleges
the officers at Telfair County Jail had no medical training
and there was no medical professional on call to handle
medical situations. (Id.) Plaintiff also complained
about Telfair County Jail having black mold and no
ventilation system, being “non-habitable, ” and
containing asbestos. (Id. at 8.)
March 7 to March 10, 2019, Plaintiffs blood pressure was
recorded to be as high as 208/180. (Id. at 5.) Lt.
Moon said he would take Plaintiff to urgent care because of
the high blood pressure readings but never did (Id.)
On March 11, 2019, a female jail officer took Plaintiff to
urgent care, where a doctor prescribed Plaintiff an
antibiotic for a sinus infection and blood pressure
medication. (Id. at 8.)
filed a grievance and wrote a newspaper article regarding his
medical treatment, complaining about black mold, his blood
pressure, and the lack of medical staff at the jail.
(Id. at 10.) Upon receiving Plaintiffs grievance,
Sheriff Christ Stevenson retaliated against Plaintiff and
transported him to Dodge County jail. (Id. at 2.)
Plaintiff was not allowed to bring any of his personal
property. (Id.) Plaintiff wrote to Sheriff Stevenson
but received no response. (Id.at 11.) Plaintiff's family
then called Sheriff Stevenson, and Sheriff Stevenson stated
he transferred Plaintiff because of the grievance and
newspaper article written by Plaintiff. (Id.)
relief, Plaintiff requests Sheriff Stevenson be penalized and
forced to resign as Sheriff of Telfair County. (Id.
at 7-8.) Plaintiff also requests $25, 000 in damages against
Sheriff Stevenson in his official capacity and $10, 000 in
his individual capacity. (Id.) Plaintiff requests
$25, 000 in damages against Lt. Moon in his official capacity
and $5, 000 in his individual capacity for delaying medical
care. (Id.) Lastly, Plaintiff requests $2, 500 each
from OFC. #1-4 in their official and individual capacities
for delaying medical care. (Id.)
Legal Standard for Screening
complaint or any portion thereof may be dismissed if it is
frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which
relief may be granted, or if it seeks monetary relief from a
defendant who is immune to such relief. See 28 U.S.C.
§§ 1915(e)(2)(B) and 1915A(b). A claim is frivolous
if it “lacks an arguable basis either in law or in
fact.” Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 327
(1989). “Failure to state a claim under §
1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) is governed by the same standard as
dismissal for failure to state a claim under Fed.R.Civ.P.
12(b)(6).” Wilkerson v. H & S, Inc., 366
Fed.Appx. 49, 51 (11th Cir. 2010) (citing Mitchell v.
Farcass, 112 F.3d 1483, 1490 (11th Cir. 1997)).
avoid dismissal for failure to state a claim upon which
relief can be granted, the allegations in the complaint must
“state a claim for 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
unadorned, the defendant unlawfully-harmed-me
accusation.” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678. A
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.
the 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. Haines v.
Kerner,404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972); Erickson v.
Pardus,551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007). However, this liberal
construction does not mean that the court has a duty ...