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.

Killough v. Burnham

United States District Court, D. Utah

May 30, 2019

MATT KILLOUGH, Plaintiff,
v.
BRUCE O. BURNHAM et al., Defendants.

          MEMORANDUM DECISION & ORDER TO CURE DEFICIENT COMPLAINT

          CLARK WADDOUPS UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE.

         District Judge Clark Waddoups Plaintiff, inmate Matt Killough, brings this pro se civil-rights action, see 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 (2019), [1] in forma pauperis, see 28 Id. § 1915. Having now screened the Amended Complaint, (Doc. No. 26), under its statutory review function, [2] the Court orders Plaintiff to file a second amended complaint to cure deficiencies before further pursuing claims.

         AMENDED COMPLAINT'S DEFICIENCIES

         Amended Complaint:

(a) does not properly affirmatively link defendants to civil-rights violations.
(b) appears to inappropriately allege civil-rights violations on respondeat-superior theory.
(c) names some possible defendants only in the text, not in Complaint's heading (e.g., Tony Washington, Timothy Dennis, and Officer St. Jermaine).
(d) alleges possible constitutional violations resulting in injuries that appear to be prohibited by 42 U.S.C.S. § 1997e(e) (2019), 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.”
(e) does not adequately state a claim of inadequate medical treatment. (See below.)
(f) asserts claims that, from the face of the amended complaint, are possibly past the statute of limitations for a civil-rights case. (See below.)
(g) improperly asserts a retaliation claim. (See below.)
(h) needs clarification regarding Equal Protection Clause cause of action. (See below.)
(i) has claims apparently regarding current confinement; however, complaint apparently not drafted with contract attorneys' help.

         GUIDANCE FOR PLAINTIFF

         Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires a complaint to contain "(1) a short and plain statement of the grounds for the court's jurisdiction . . .; (2) a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief; and (3) a demand for the relief sought." Rule 8's requirements mean to guarantee "that defendants enjoy fair notice of what the claims against them are and the grounds upon which they rest." TV Commc'ns Network, Inc. v ESPN, Inc., 767 F.Supp. 1062, 1069 (D. Colo. 1991).

         Pro se litigants are not excused from meeting these minimal pleading demands. "This is so because a pro se plaintiff requires no special legal training to recount the facts surrounding his alleged injury, and he must provide such facts if the court is to determine whether he makes out a claim on which relief can be granted." Hall v. Bellmon, 935 F.2d 1106, 1110 (10th Cir. 1991). Moreover, it is improper for the Court "to assume the role of advocate for a pro se litigant." Id. Thus, the Court cannot "supply additional facts, [or] construct a legal ...


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.