United States District Court, D. Connecticut
RULING AND ORDER
Michael P. Shea United States District Judge.
plaintiff, Wayne Rogers, is incarcerated at the
MacDougall-Walker Correctional Institution in Suffield,
Connecticut. He has filed an amended complaint naming
Correctional Officer Turner and Lieutenant Ballan as
defendants. For the reasons set forth below, the amended
complaint is dismissed in part.
to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b), the Court must review prisoner
civil complaints against governmental actors and
“dismiss . . . any portion of [a] complaint [that] is
frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which
relief may be granted, ” or that “seeks monetary
relief from a defendant who is immune from such
relief.” Id. Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure requires that a complaint contain “a
short and plain statement of the claim showing that the
pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2).
detailed allegations are not required, “a complaint
must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to
state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face. A
claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads
factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable
inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct
alleged.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678
(2009) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). A
complaint that includes only “‘labels and
conclusions, ' ‘a formulaic recitation of the
elements of a cause of action' or ‘naked
assertion[s]' devoid of ‘further factual
enhancement, '” does not meet the facial
plausibility standard. Id. (quoting Bell Atl.
Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555, 557 (2007)).
Although courts have an obligation to interpret “a
pro se complaint liberally, ” the complaint
must include sufficient factual allegations to meet the
standard of facial plausibility. See Harris v.
Mills, 572 F.3d 66, 72 (2d Cir. 2009) (citations
plaintiff claims that in July 2015, he was incarcerated at
Corrigan Correctional Institution. On July 26, 2015,
Correctional Officer Turner asked the plaintiff to leave his
cell and to wait in the stairway. Officer Turner then spent
two hours searching the plaintiff's cell. The plaintiff
observed Officer Turner take his radio and throw away his
food tray. When the plaintiff questioned Officer Turner about
the food and radio, Officer Turner became enraged, slammed
the plaintiff to the floor of his cell, and swore at him.
After Officer Turner left the plaintiff's cell, the
plaintiff covered the window in the door of his cell in an
effort to make the officers in the housing unit to summon a
lieutenant to his cell.
Ballan arrived at the plaintiff's cell and spoke to the
plaintiff about why he had covered his cell window. The
plaintiff disclosed that he felt unsafe and asked to speak
with mental health staff. Lieutenant Ballan refused to permit
the plaintiff to leave his cell or to speak with someone from
the mental health department. The plaintiff then falsely
informed Lieutenant Ballan that he had spread feces around
his cell and again requested to see mental health staff.
Lieutenant Ballan threatened the plaintiff with physical harm
if he continued to keep his cell window covered. Other
officers attempted to speak to the plaintiff through the cell
door, but the plaintiff ignored them and refused to remove
the covering from his cell window.
plaintiff lay on the floor of his cell to wait for mental
health personnel to arrive. Lieutenant Ballan sprayed a
chemical agent into the plaintiff's cell. Officers then
entered the plaintiff's cell to handcuff and remove him
from the cell. During this process, Officer Turner punched
the plaintiff in the face and spit and swore at him. The
plaintiff lost consciousness at one point. Officers dragged
the plaintiff backwards out of the cell by his arms because
he could not walk. Officers then brought a wheelchair to
transport the plaintiff to the medical department.
staff members treated the plaintiff's injuries. Officers
then escorted the plaintiff to the restrictive housing unit,
strip-searched him, and placed him in a cell that was filthy
and smelled of urine and feces.
plaintiff informed Lieutenant Ballan of the conditions in the
cell and that he felt dizzy and nauseous, but Lieutenant
Ballan refused to take any action to remedy the conditions. A
short time later, the plaintiff notified other officers that
he felt dizzy and nauseous. Those officers summoned medical
staff to the plaintiff's cell. After speaking to the
plaintiff, medical staff directed the officers to move the
plaintiff to the medical unit for observation.
following day, officers escorted the plaintiff back to the
“same dirty cell.” (ECF No. 11 at 14.) Medical
staff recommended that the plaintiff take pain medication and
rest. The plaintiff suffers from headaches, shoulder pain,
anxiety, and high blood pressure.
relief, the plaintiff seeks monetary damages as well as
declaratory and injunctive relief. To the extent the
plaintiff seeks damages against the defendants in their
official capacities, the claims are barred by the Eleventh
Amendment. See Kentucky v. Graham, 473 U.S. 159
(1985); Quern v. Jordan, 440 U.S. 332, 342 (1979).
All such claims are dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
court concludes that the plaintiff has stated plausible
Eighth Amendment claims of deliberate indifference to his
health and safety and the use of excessive force against
Officer Turner and plausible Eighth Amendment claims of
deliberate indifference to his health and safety, deliberate
indifference to medical and mental health needs, and the use
of excessive force against Lieutenant Ballan. These claims
will proceed against the defendants in their individual
capacities and in their official capacities to the extent
that the plaintiff seeks declaratory and injunctive relief.
Court enters the ...