United States District Court, W.D. Arkansas, Fayetteville Division
OPINION AND ORDER
TIMOTHY L. BROOKS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
Duane Gross, 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
("IFP"). Plaintiff has named as Defendants Sheriff
Holloway, Deputy Kohler, Deputy Meadows, Nurse Jessie, Deputy
Skaggs, and the John Doe co-workers of Deputy Meadows.
Complaint (Doc. 1) is 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.
to the allegations of the Complaint, on December 13, 2018,
Plaintiff alleges that he was denied a mat to sleep on and
instead given what is referred to as a "suicide
blanket." He identifies the Defendants involved as
Deputy Meadows and his "fellow shift co-workers."
Plaintiff alleges he was told later that there were mats in
the supply closet. Plaintiff contends that because he slept
on the concrete floor with only a suicide blanket for
padding, his tail bone, elbows, hips, and shoulders were
Plaintiff alleges he was denied immediate medical attention
on December 21, 2018, by Nurse Jessie and Deputy Skaggs.
Plaintiff states he went to nurse call and "presented
[his] eye to nurse and deputy and they both seemed to not
care [he] had an inflamed bleeding bloodshot eye." He
was told to put in a medical request. Plaintiff believed it
was an "emergency due to [his] to it being [his] sight
at risk." On an attachment to his Complaint, Plaintiff
asserted that as of December 26, 2018, he was still suffering
from loss of vision, infection, severe pain, and
Plaintiff alleges that on December 22, 2018, at 10:00 am,
Deputy Kohler openly "disrespected" Plaintiff
"in front of his co-workers." Specifically,
Plaintiff alleges Deputy Kohler humiliated him in connection
with his last name. Plaintiff alleges Deputy Kohler would not
allow him to be placed back in his housing unit until Deputy
Kohler was "satisfied with [Plaintiffs] public
humiliation." Plaintiff also alleges that Deputies
Kohler and Skaggs "disrespected" him and slandered
him because his last name is Gross, and his eye looked
"gross." He states he was in severe pain while they
were making fun of him.
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 "personally
violated plaintiffs constitutional rights" Jackson
v. Nixon, 747 F.3d 537, 543 (8th Cir. 2014) (citation
Sleeping on the Floor
alleges he was forced to sleep on the concrete floor with
only a "suicide blanket" for a single night. This
allegation does not state a cognizable claim under §
1983. See, e.g., Hamilton v. Mauldin, 2015 WL
898080, at *2 (W.D. Ark. Mar. 3, 2015) (requiring inmate to
sleep on floor without a mattress and with only a blanket and
two sheets for seven or eight nights not a constitutional
violation) (citing O'Leary v. Iowa State Men's
Reformatory,79 F.3d 82, 84 (8th Cir. 1996) (inmate
forced to spend four days sleeping on a concrete slab without
a blanket or mattress did not state a constitutional
violation)); Williams v. Delo,49 F.3d 442 (8th
Cir.1995) (holding that four days without water, a mattress,
bedding, clothing, legal mail, or hygienic supplies did not
violate the Eighth Amendment); see also Desroche v.
Strain,507 F.Supp.2d 571, 579-80 (E.D. La. 2007)
(sleeping on the floor in a crowded holding tank for ten days
failed to state a constitutional ...