Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Parker v. Camden County Correctional Facility

United States District Court, D. New Jersey

February 7, 2017

ALBERT PARKER, Plaintiff,
v.
CAMDEN COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY and WARDEN DAVID S. OWENS, Defendants.

          Albert Parker, Plaintiff Pro Se.

          OPINION

          JEROME B. SIMANDLE Chief U.S. District Judge.

         I. INTRODUCTION

         Plaintiff Albert Parker seeks to bring a civil rights complaint against Camden County Correctional Facility (“CCCF”) and Warden David S. Owens (“Owens”) (collectively, “Defendants”) pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for allegedly unconstitutional conditions of confinement. Complaint, Docket Entry 1.

         28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2) requires a court to review complaints prior to service in cases in which a plaintiff is proceeding in forma pauperis. The Court must sua sponte dismiss any claim that is frivolous, is malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. This action is subject to sua sponte screening for dismissal under Section 1915(e)(2)(B) because Plaintiff is proceeding in forma pauperis.

         For the reasons set forth below, the Court will dismiss the Complaint with prejudice for failure to state a claim. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(b)(ii).

         II. BACKGROUND

         Plaintiff's Complaint states: “I was forced to live in inhumane conditions while incarcerated. Forced to sleep on cell floors by a toilet getting urine on my mattress and clothing and sheets. I was unable [sic] to wash my soiled clothing only once a week causing skin breakouts. Sleeping on a thin mattress on concrete left me with consistent back pain. I was forced to shower in fungus filled showers.” Complaint § III(C).

         Plaintiff states that the alleged events giving rise to these claims occurred: “June 2011.” Id. § III(B).

         With respect to alleged injuries from these events, Plaintiff states: “Back neck rashes. [T]his [is] why I collect di[s]ability.” Id. § IV.

         Plaintiff seeks $5, 000 in relief. Id. § V.

         III. STANDARD OF REVIEW

         To survive sua sponte screening under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) for failure to state a claim, a complaint must allege “sufficient factual matter” to show that the claim is facially plausible. Fowler v. UPMS Shadyside, 578 F.3d 203, 210 (3d Cir. 2009) (citation omitted). “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.” Fair Wind Sailing, Inc. v. Dempster, 764 F.3d 303, 308 n.3 (3d Cir. 2014). “[A] pleading that offers ‘labels or conclusions' or ‘a formulaic recitation of ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.