United States District Court, D. Connecticut
INITIAL REVIEW ORDER
R. Underhill, United States District Judge.
plaintiff, William Moore, formerly confined at Osborn
Correctional Institution, resides in Middletown, Connecticut.
He has filed the instant civil rights action under 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983 against Parole Officers Wendy Jones, Richard
Gibbons and John Doe (collectively,
“Defendants”), seeking monetary damages from
Defendants in their individual capacities. As set forth in
his complaint, Moore principally alleges that Defendants
remanded him back to a Department of Correction prison
facility in retaliation for an inmate grievance that he filed
against Jones. Moore asserts claims under the First and
Eighth Amendment, as well as claims for intentional
infliction of emotional distress and false imprisonment. For
the reasons set forth below, the complaint is
dismissed in part.
Standard of Review
28 U.S.C. § 1915A, I must review prisoner civil
complaints and dismiss any portion of the complaint that is
frivolous or malicious, that 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. See
28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). This standard of review
“appl[ies] to all civil complaints brought by prisoners
against governmental officials or entities regardless of
whether the prisoner has paid [a] filing fee.”
Shakur v. Selsky, 391 F.3d 106, 112 (2d Cir. 2004)
(internal quotation marks and citation omitted).
detailed allegations are not required, the complaint must
include sufficient facts to afford the defendants fair notice
of the claims and the grounds upon which they are based.
See Bell Atlantic v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555-56
(2007). In addition, the plaintiff must plead “enough
facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its
face, ” Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570, and
conclusory allegations will not suffice, Ashcroft v.
Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009). Nevertheless, it is
well-established that “[p]ro se
complaints ‘must be construed liberally and interpreted
to raise the strongest arguments that they
suggest.'” Sykes v. Bank of Am., 723 F.3d
399, 403 (2d Cir. 2013) (quoting Triestman v. Fed. Bureau
of Prisons, 470 F.3d 471, 474 (2d Cir. 2006)); see
also Tracy v. Freshwater, 623 F.3d 90, 101-02 (2d Cir.
2010) (discussing special rules of solicitude afforded to
pro se litigants).
3, 2017, Department of Correction officials transferred Moore
to Sierra House, a community placement facility, where
Defendants were assigned. See Compl., Doc. No. 4, at
¶¶ 5, 8. Sierra House contracts with the Department
of Correction to house prisoners on parole. See Id.
at ¶ 8. During his confinement at Sierra House, Moore
enrolled in Gateway Community College as a full-time student
and was hired for work study on July 15, 2017. Id.
at ¶¶ 9-10. On July 22, 2017, Moore began to work
full-time at Price Right. Id. at ¶ 10.
unspecified time, Moore became eligible to be furloughed from
Sierra House to a private residence. Id. at ¶
11. Moore's sponsor, Khalilah Escoffery, visited Sierra
House to complete the necessary paperwork for the furlough;
Moore's counselor then reviewed and forwarded the
paperwork to Parole Officer Jones. Id. at
¶¶ 11, 15.
August 29, 2017, Moore was told to notify Price Right that he
would be late to work because Jones wanted to speak with him.
Id. at ¶ 12. Jones asked Moore questions, and
indicated that she had granted his request for transitional
parole but had denied his request to be furloughed to his
Escoffery's home. See Id. at ¶ 13. Jones
specifically stated that she “was not allowing him [to]
furlough with anyone named Khalilah anything.”
Id. When Moore asked for an explanation, Officer
Jones became “belligerent and combative, ” and
yelled “because [I] can . . . now get the f- outta
here.” Id. Plaintiff left feeling
“extreme anger.” Id. Moore thereafter
filed an inmate grievance regarding Officer Jones's
behavior, placing it in the administrative remedy box at
Sierra House. Id. at ¶ 14.
also asked Escoffery to call the New Haven Parole Office to
submit his complaint about Officer Jones's conduct.
Id. at ¶ 15. The New Haven Office advised
Escoffery to contact the Wethersfield Parole Office about the
issue, and Escoffery did so. Id.
September 1, 2017, the assistant director of Sierra House
asked to speak to Moore about his grievance in her office.
Id. at ¶ 16. When Moore stepped into her
office, Defendants arrested Moore. Id. at ¶ 16.
When Moore asked why he was being arrested, Jones replied
“[because] you wrote a grievance against me.”
Id. at ¶ 18. Gibbons echoed Jones's
statement, saying “because you complained to the
office in Wethersfield about my friend.” Id.
at ¶ 19. John Doe then stated, “ain't no one
gonna write up any one of us up and not pay, ” and
Gibbons reiterated, “you make a complaint against one
of us . . . it's the same as having an issue with all of
us.” Id. at ¶ 20.
then said, “we are above the law! We cannot be stopped
[because] we are your Judge and jury.” Id. at
¶ 21. Laughing, John Doe continued, “and we find
you guilty of being a complainer.” Id. Moore
felt “fear” and “depressed.”
Id. at ¶¶ 19-20. Defendants proceeded to
“take [Moore] to Jail and incarcerated him.”
Id. at ¶ 21.
also wrote a disciplinary incident report against Moore.
Id. at ¶ 22. The hearing officer, however,
dismissed the report as “fraudulent.”