Stevenson v. Benjamin

• Court: District Court, M.D. Louisiana
• Decided: August 25, 2020
• Docket: 3:19-cv-00637
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

CHRISTOPHER STEVENSON CIVIL ACTION (#509582)

VERSUS KEVIN BENJAMIN, ET AL. NO. 19-00637-BAJ-SDJ

RULING AND ORDER Before the Court is Defendant Warden Darrel Vannoy’s Motion To Dismiss (Doc. 15), seeking dismissal of Plaintiff’s constitutional claims related to an alleged attack by prison officials while Plaintiff was secured in 4-point restraints. The Magistrate Judge has issued a Report And Recommendation (Doc. 50) recommending that Plaintiff’s claims against Warden Vannoy be dismissed because Plaintiff has failed to allege Warden Vannoy’s personal involvement in the attack, and has likewise failed to identify any specific policy implemented by Warden Vannoy that resulted in the alleged attack. Plaintiff filed a timely Objection to the Magistrate Judge’s Report. (Doc. 54). Having independently considered Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant’s Motion, and related filings—including Plaintiff’s Objection—the Court agrees that Plaintiff’s allegations, as currently stated, fail to state a claim against Warden Vannoy. It appears from Plaintiff’s pro se Objection, however, that Plaintiff may be able to identify specific policies implemented by Warden Vannoy resulting in the alleged attack, and thus may still allege a colorable claim against Warden Vannoy. See, e.g., Doc. 54 at pp. 8-10. Plaintiff has not previously been allowed to amend his Complaint, and the Court is satisfied that the ends of justice are served by allowing amendment here. Bailey v. Dallas Cty. Jail Sys. Sheriff's Dep't, 20 F.3d 469 (5th Cir. 1994) (“Even

had Bailey not moved to amend, a pro se plaintiff should be permitted to amend his pleadings … when it is clear from his complaint that there is a potential ground for relief.” (quotation marks and alterations omitted)). Accordingly, the Court APPROVES IN PART the Magistrate Judge’s REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (Doc. 50), IT IS ORDERED that Defendant Warden Darrel Vannoy’s Motion to Dismiss

is GRANTED, and that Plaintiff’s claims against Warden Vannoy are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, subject to Plaintiff’s right to file an amended complaint identifying specific policies implemented by Warden Vannoy resulting in the alleged attack on or before October 15, 2020. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this matter is referred back to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings on Plaintiff’s remaining claims. Baton Rouge, Louisiana, this 25th day of August, 2020

______________________________________ JUDGE BRIAN A. JACKSON UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA