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.

Neese v. Cache County Jail

United States District Court, D. Utah

February 4, 2019

MICHAEL RAY NEESE, Plaintiff,
v.
CACHE COUNTY JAIL et al., Defendants.

          ORDER TO CURE DEFICIENT COMPLAINT & MEMORANDUM DECISION

          JUDGE TED STEWART UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT.

         Plaintiff, inmate Michael Ray Neese, filed this pro se civil rights suit, see 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 (2018), in forma pauperis, see 28 Id. § 1915. The Court now screens the Complaint and orders Plaintiff to file an amended complaint to cure deficiencies before further pursuing claims.

         COMPLAINT'S DEFICIENCIES

         Complaint:

         (a) alleges possible constitutional violations resulting in injuries that appear to be prohibited by 42 U.S.C.S. § 1997e(e) (2018), which reads, "No Federal civil action may be brought by a prisoner . . . for mental or emotional injury suffered while in custody without a prior showing of a physical injury or the commission of a sexual act.”

         (b) alleges “random and unauthorized deprivation of property under color of state law, ” without considering that such a claim “does not give rise to a § 1983 claim if there is an adequate state post-deprivation remedy.” See Frazier v Flores, No. 13-1535, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 12936, at *4 (10th Cir. July 9, 2014) (unpublished) (citing Hudson v. Palmer, 468 U.S. 517, 533 (1984)).

         (c) does not affirmatively link some defendants to civil-rights violations.

         (d) appears to inappropriately allege civil-rights violations (e.g., against Jail Commander Peck) on a respondeat-superior theory.

         (e) improperly names Cache County Jail as a defendant, though it is not an independent legal entity that can sue or be sued.

         (f) refers to John-Doe types, without giving detailed enough information to allow them to be identified.

         (g) states some general claims that do not specify how Plaintiff himself was injured, which calls into question his standing to bring these claims. Jordan v. Sosa, 654 F.3d 1012, 1019 (10th Cir. 2011) (stating plaintiff must show “(a) an injury in fact; (2) a causal connection between the injury and the challenged action; and (3) a likelihood that a favorable decision will redress the injury”) (citation omitted).

         (h) does not state a proper legal-access claim. (See below.)

         (i) does not state a claim for “right to privacy.”

         (j) inappropriately allege civil-rights violations on the ...


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.