United States District Court, W.D. Arkansas, Texarkana Division
O. Hickey, Chief United States District Judge
a civil rights action filed by Plaintiff Hosea L Kendrick
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff proceeds pro
se and in forma pauperis. The case is before
the Court for preservice screening under the provisions of
the Prison Litigation Reform Act (“PLRA”), 28
U.S.C. § 1915A. Pursuant to the PLRA, the Court has the
obligation to screen any complaint in which a prisoner seeks
redress from a governmental entity, officer, or employee.
filed his Complaint on February 4, 2019, in the Eastern
District of Arkansas. (ECF No. 1). The following day, the
case was transferred to the Western District of Arkansas,
Texarkana Division. (ECF No. 2). On February 11, 2019, the
Court ordered Plaintiff to submit an in forma
pauperis (“IFP”) application and file an
Amended Complaint to clarify his claims. (ECF No. 5). On
March 8, 2019, Plaintiff filed his IFP application (ECF No.
7) and an Amended Complaint. (ECF No. 6). Plaintiff's
application to proceed IFP was granted the same day. (ECF No.
March 11, 2019, Plaintiff advised the Court that he is no
longer incarcerated and now resides in Stamps, Arkansas. The
incidents giving rise to Plaintiff's Amended Complaint
occurred while Plaintiff was incarcerated in the Nevada
County Detention Center (“NCDC”) for violation of
his probation. (ECF No. 6, p. 3). Plaintiff has named Tommi
Hash and Peter Rupe, jailors at the NCDC, as Defendants. He
refers to his claim as “medical”. (ECF No. 6, p.
4). Specifically, Plaintiff states:
When this happened, Tommi Hash be littled me in front of
everybody in the pod. The very next day Peter Rupe did the
same thing, and I took my jumpsuit off in front of everybody
to prove that I did take my medication, and that it
wasn't on my person. I felt embarrassed and humiliated,
and that has caused mental anguish…
From the actions that took place that day, I am constantly
getting picked on by the other inmates, and by me suffering
from PTSD and bipolar, that has caused me a lot of mental
anguish, and I did not like that at all. Plus, I take my
medication because I need, and a nurse not a jail should pass
(ECF No. 6, p. 4-5). Plaintiff is suing Defendants in their
individual and official capacities. He seeks both
compensatory and punitive damages as well as additional
equitable relief stating:
I feel that I should be compensated for the mental anguish
that I suffered, and the embarrassment that they caused.
Also, I feel that they should be repremended or fired because
I feel that the jailors shouldn't pass out medication.
They should have a nurse on staff or each shift for that.
(ECF No. 6, p.7).
the PLRA, the Court is obligated to screen this 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) seeks 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 Atlantic 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)).
However, even a pro se Plaintiff must allege
specific facts sufficient to support a claim. Martin v.
Sargent, 780 F.2d 1334, 1337 (8th Cir. 1985).