United States District Court, D. New Jersey
L. Rogers, Plaintiff Pro Se.
B. SIMANDLE U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE.
L. Rogers seeks to bring a civil rights complaint pursuant to
42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the Camden County Correctional
Facility (“CCCF”). Complaint, Docket Entry 1.
Based on Plaintiff's affidavit of indigency, the Court
will grant her application to proceed in forma
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
reasons set forth below it is clear from the complaint that
the claim arose more than two years before the complaint was
filed. It is therefore barred by the two-year statute of
limitations that governs claims of unconstitutional conduct
under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The Court will therefore dismiss
the complaint with prejudice for failure to state a claim. 28
U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(b)(ii).
alleges that between July 15 and December 23, 2010, she was
detained in the CCCF. Complaint § III. She further
alleges that she was “force[d] to live in bad and
unclean conditions.” Id. She further alleges
she “got lice in my hair from the dirty mattress they
gave me that I was not allow to disinfect that left bald
spots all over my head and rashes all around my private
STANDARD OF REVIEW
1915(e)(2) requires a court to review complaints prior to
service of the summons and complaint 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 28 U.S.C. §
1915(e)(2)(B) because Plaintiff is proceeding in forma
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) (quoting Iqbal, 556 U.S. at
678). “[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
complaint alleges that she experienced unconstitutional
conditions of confinement while she was detained in the CCCF
between July 15 and December 23, 2010. Civil rights claims
under § 1983 are governed by New Jersey's
limitations period for personal injury and must be brought
within two years of the claim's accrual. See Wilson
v. Garcia, 471 U.S. 261, 276 (1985); Dique v. New
Jersey State Police, 603 F.3d 181, 185 (3d Cir. 2010).
“Under federal law, a cause of action accrues
‘when the plaintiff knew or should have known of the
injury upon which the action is based.'”
Montanez v. Sec'y Pa. Dep't of Corr., 773
F.3d 472, 480 (3d Cir. 2014) (quoting Kach v. Hose,
589 F.3d 626, 634 (3d Cir. 2009)).
allegedly unconstitutional conditions of confinement at CCCF
would have been immediately apparent to Plaintiff at the time
of her detention; therefore, the statute of limitations for
Plaintiff's claims expired December 23, 2012 at the
latest, well before this complaint was filed in 2017.
Plaintiff has filed her lawsuit too late. Although the Court
may toll, or extend, the statute of limitations in the
interests of justice, certain circumstances must be present
before it can do so. Tolling is not warranted in this case
because the state has not “actively misled”
Plaintiff as to the existence of her cause of action, there
are no extraordinary circumstances that prevented ...