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.

Adams v. Camden County Jail

United States District Court, D. New Jersey

June 30, 2017

MATTHEW T. ADAMS, Plaintiff,
v.
CAMDEN COUNTY JAIL, Defendant.

          Matthew T. Adams Plaintiff Pro Se.

          OPINION

          JEROME B. SIMANDLE U.S. District Judge.

         I. INTRODUCTION

         Plaintiff Matthew T. Adams seeks to bring a civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Camden County Jail (“CCJ”) for allegedly unconstitutional conditions of confinement. Complaint, Docket Entry 1.

         At this time, the Court must review the Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) to determine whether it should be dismissed as frivolous or malicious, for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or because it seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 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

         Here, Plaintiff's Complaint states: “Nov 1 2010 I was sentence [sic] in Camden County Jail where I was told to sleep on the floor[.] [T]heir [sic] wasn't enough space for me[.] [T]heir [sic] were 4 of us to the cell and me being overwait [sic] trying to fit somewhere was humiluting [sic] and degrading and embarrassing[, ] not to mention that every time one [of] the inmate[s] had to urinate I could feel the splatter. Most of that entire time was sleepless nights because I just could not get off that floor. [W]hen [I] complain[ed] to the staff sergeant[, ] he said nothing is going to change[;] we are overcrowded[.] Oct 31/06 [sic] on the floor again and this time while on the floor my sneakers 2 sizes small [sic] and I caught infection[.] [A]nother time my jumpsuit 4X, [and] I needed at least 8X. [T]hey made me walk around like I had on spandex[.] [E]verybody including the gaurds [sic] laughed at [me].” Complaint § III. Plaintiff alleges that he “suffer[ed] deep emostional [sic] pain being treated like I was a[n] animal[.] [T]he cell[s] were deplor-able [sic][.] I [was] force[d] to where [sic] small fitting sneakes [sic] & jumpsuite [sic]. Caught so many infections, back pain[.] I felt less then [sic] human. Nightmares[, ] arthritis, force[d] to live in a cell with 4 people made for 2.” Id. § IV.

         Plaintiff alleges the events giving rise to these claims allegedly occurred: “11/01/10 - 36 days[;] 10/31/06 - 74 days[;] 9/11/05 - 16 days[;] 3/27/05 - 12 days.” Id. § III.

         Plaintiff seeks $4, 000 in damages, along with “help for the current [inmates, ] a lot of them were just like myself[.] [T]here [sic] voices were never heard[.] I know I didn't derseve [sic] to be treating [sic] that way and they don't either.” Id. § V.

         III. STANDARD OF REVIEW

         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. Pursuant to § 1915(e)(2), this 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 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) because Plaintiff is proceeding in forma pauperis.

         To survive sua sponte screening for failure to state a claim, the 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 the elements of a cause of action will not do.'” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)).

         IV. DISCUSSION

         Plaintiff seeks monetary damages from CCJ for allegedly unconstitutional conditions of confinement. Primarily, the Complaint must be dismissed as the CCJ is not a “state actor” within the meaning of § 1983. See, e.g., Grabow v. Southern State Corr. Facility, 726 F.Supp. 537, 538-39 (D.N.J. 1989) (correctional facility is not a ...


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.