United States District Court, E.D. Tennessee, Winchester
S. MATTICE, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
pro se, Jason Mac Brown brings this civil rights complaint
for injunctive and monetary relief under 42 U.S.C. §
1983, claiming that he has been subjected to unconstitutional
conditions and treatment at the Warren County Jail in
McMinnville, Tennessee, where he is confined [Doc. 1].
Defendants are the Warren County Jail (“WCJ”);
the WCJ Nursing Staff and Administration; Eddie Knowles, WCJ
Administrator; Jackie Matheny, Warren County Sheriff; and
Dave Snowden, a WCJ correctional officer who works the night
shift. In the body of the complaint, Plaintiff indicates that
Christy L/N/U, Joe L/N/U, and Carol L/N/U are the members of
the Nursing Staff whom he is suing in their official
capacities as nurses, though he has not identified them as
Defendants in the caption of his pleading.
the Middle District, where this action was filed originally,
assessed the filing fee before transferring the case to this
Court [Doc. 3],the Court turns first to the contentions in
complaint contains the assertions which follow. Plaintiff
suffers from hypoglycemia, a disease evidenced by low blood
sugar levels [Doc. 1 p.6]. When Plaintiff’s blood sugar
levels drop, he suffers from weakness, headaches, and
dizziness. However, Plaintiff’s blood sugar levels are
tested regularly, the levels range in the 60s, though they
can descend to levels in the low 50s [Id.].
Plaintiff has written many times to the nurse and he has even
filed grievances complaining about the failure to measure his
blood sugar levels on a regular basis [Id.].
when Plaintiff was in the nursing staff room, he was told to
check his own sugar levels [Id.]. However, the
medical device for monitoring blood levels was not
functioning [Id.]. After this encounter,
Plaintiff’s blood levels were not monitored. Because of
the medical inattentiveness of the nursing staff, Plaintiff
sits in his cell and worries, knowing that his blood sugar
level is low and that low blood sugar levels can be dangerous
[Id.]. Plaintiff believes that they would let him
die and that, if he did not obtain items from the commissary,
he really would be in bad shape [Id.]. The medical
staff refuses to give an inmate even an aspirin or a Tylenol.
Furthermore, the 2,000-calorie per-day diet served at the WCJ
is insufficient for Plaintiff because he has low blood sugar
the facility has no existing grievance system and an inmate
who asks for a grievance is asked why he needs a grievance
[Id.]. Plaintiff personally has never seen a
grievance form and has used notebook paper to file a
grievance. Plaintiff received no response to his notepaper
was arrested on February 15, 2013, and was booked into the
WCJ and thereafter assigned to cell number 24 in B-Pod [Doc.
1 p.8]. Plaintiff informed a guard, Defendant Dave Snowden,
that he had enemies in that cell, but Defendant Snowden
responded that the inmates would just have to “get
along” with one another [Id.]. Within
forty-eight hours, several inmates jumped on Plaintiff and
beat him while he was asleep, thus putting him “in
imminent danger” [Id.]. Plaintiff asks for an
unspecified amount of damages for the cruel and unusual
punishment purportedly inflicted on him and for the resulting
pain and suffering which he sustained from a bodily injury-an
injury for which he has provided no further description [Doc.
SCREENING and LEGAL STANDARDS
Court must now review the complaint to determine whether it
states a claim entitling Plaintiff to relief or is frivolous
or malicious or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is
immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) and
§ 1915A. If so, this suit must be dismissed. In
performing this task, the Court bears in mind the rule that
pro se pleadings filed in civil rights cases must be
liberally construed and held to a less stringent standard
than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers. Haines v.
Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972).
the complaint must be sufficient “to state a claim to
relief that is plausible on its face,” Bell
Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007),
which simply means that the factual content pled by a
plaintiff must permit a court “to draw the reasonable
inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct
alleged.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678
(2009) (citing Twombly, 550 U.S. at 556). The
standard articulated in Twombly and Iqbal
“governs dismissals for failure to state a claim under
[§§ 1915A(b)(1) and 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii)] because the
relevant statutory language tracks the language in Rule
12(b)(6).” Hill v. Lappin, 630 F.3d 468,
470–71 (6th Cir. 2010).
order to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Plaintiff
must establish that he was deprived of a federal right by a
person acting under color of state law. See Black v.
Barberton Citizens Hosp., 134 F.3d 1265, 1267 (6th Cir.
1998); see also Braley v. City of Pontiac, 906 F.2d
220, 223 (6th Cir. 1990) (“Section 1983 does not itself
create any constitutional rights; it creates a right of
action for the vindication of constitutional guarantees found
Court examines the claims under these guidelines.