United States District Court, W.D. Arkansas, Fayetteville Division
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
TIMOTHY L. BROOKS, DISTRICT JUDGE.
Linwood Hughes, currently an inmate of the Benton County
Detention Center ("BCDC"), has filed this civil
rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He proceeds
pro se and in forma pauperis
filed the Complaint (Doc. 1), Plaintiff failed to include
page 6. He was given time to submit the missing page. It has
now been filed as a Supplement (Doc. 6) to the Complaint.
Plaintiff has named as Defendants the following: four members
of the medical staff at the BCDC, Nurse Infante, Lead Nurse
Stephens, Dr. Saez, and Nurse Jane Doe; and four BCDC
deputies, Deputy Kemp, Deputy Lyo, Deputy Furby, and Deputy
Cobb. With the exception of Deputy Cobb,
Plaintiff has sued the Defendants in both their individual
and official capacities. Plaintiff has sued Deputy Cobb in
his official capacity only.
Complaint and Supplement are before the Court for preservice
screening under the provisions of the Prison Litigation
Reform Act ("PLRA"). Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
1915A, the Court has the obligation to screen any complaint
in which a prisoner seeks redress from a governmental entity
or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C.
maintains he is given his medication by non-medically trained
guards. He contends on two occasions, October 7, 2018, and
January 14, 2019, he was given the wrong medication.
Plaintiff alleges that Deputy Furby and Deputy Kemp were
involved in the October 7, 2018, incident. When he complained
to medical staff about having been given the wrong
medication, Plaintiff states he was told that it was his
obligation to let the nurse know if he was being given the
wrong medication. Plaintiff states he did not realize it was
the wrong medication until it was too late. He had already
respect to the January 14, 2019, incident, Plaintiff alleges
Nurse Jane Doe provided him with the wrong medication. When
he showed the nurse the medication was wrong, Plaintiff
alleges her response was that she had not packed the pouch
containing his medication.
January 3, 2018, Plaintiff alleges Deputy Cobb stopped him
from going to the nurse for his medication. Plaintiff further
alleges that the nurse allowed Deputy Cobb to bar access to
with respect to each of his claims, Plaintiff contends the
Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996
("HIPPA") was violated. As relief, Plaintiff seeks
compensatory and punitive damages.
the PLRA, the Court is obligated to screen the case prior to
service of process being issued. The Court must dismiss a
complaint, or any portion of it, if it contains claims that:
(1) are frivolous, malicious, or fail to state a claim upon
which relief may be granted; or, (2) seek monetary relief
from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C.
is frivolous if "it lacks an arguable basis either in
law or fact." Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S.
319, 325 (1989). A claim fails to state a claim upon which
relief may be granted if it does not allege "enough
facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its
face." Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S.
544, 570 (2007). "In evaluating whether a pro se
plaintiff has asserted sufficient facts to state a claim, we
hold 'a pro se complaint, however inartfully pleaded ...
to less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by
lawyers.'" Jackson v. Nixon, 747 F.3d 537,
541 (8th Cir. 2014) (quoting Erickson v. Pardus, 551
U.S. 89, 94 (2007)).
essential elements of a § 1983 claim are (1) that the
defendant(s) acted under color of state law, and (2) that the
alleged wrongful conduct deprived the plaintiff of a
constitutionally protected federal right." Schmidt
v. City of Bella Vista,557 F.3d 564, 571 (8th Cir.
2009). Section 1983 creates no substantive rights but
prohibits the deprivation of rights established by the United
States Constitution or federal laws. City of Okla. City
v. Tuttle,471 U.S. 808, 816 (1985). To state a claim,
plaintiff must establish that each defendant ...