Cornelius v. Shawano County Jail
2:24-cv-00499
E.D. Wis.Oct 11, 2024Background
- Bruce G. Cornelius, Jr., a former inmate at Shawano County Jail, filed a pro se complaint under 42 U.S.C. §1983 alleging constitutional violations.
- The complaint centers on an incident where Cornelius, classified as a medium-security detainee, was attacked by a known dangerous maximum-security inmate after officers allowed him out of his cell without ensuring others were secured.
- Cornelius alleged jail staff failed to adequately check cell doors, enabling the attack and causing him physical harm.
- The complaint named Shawano County Jail and two officers as defendants; Cornelius sought compensatory and punitive damages.
- The court first granted Cornelius’s request to proceed in forma pauperis but then screened the complaint under the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA).
- The court dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, issuing Cornelius a "strike" under 28 U.S.C. §1915(g).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Can a jail be sued under § 1983? | Jail liable as entity responsible for his safety. | Jail is not a "person" and not subject to suit. | Jail cannot be sued under § 1983. |
| Did officers fail to protect under the Fourteenth Amendment? | Officers acted unreasonably by not ensuring cell security, enabling attack. | Officers had no specific knowledge of heightened risk; general risks not enough. | No Fourteenth Amendment violation; no plausibly alleged notice or reckless disregard. |
| Is negligence sufficient for a constitutional claim? | Lax security, allowing attack, establishes constitutional violation. | Only reckless disregard, not negligence, meets the Fourteenth Amendment standard. | Negligence is insufficient for constitutional claim—must show reckless disregard. |
| Is amendment of the complaint warranted? | Sufficient factual allegations, or could be improved. | Amendment would be futile as facts do not meet the legal standard. | Amendment futile; complaint dismissed without leave to amend. |
Key Cases Cited
- Monell v. Dep't of Social Services of City of New York, 436 U.S. 658 (individuals can sue municipalities, not arms of government like jails themselves)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (pleading standards for plausibility in federal court)
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (standard for plausibility in pleadings)
- Bell v. Wolfish, 441 U.S. 520 (pretrial detainees' due process rights under Fourteenth Amendment)
- Whiting v. Marathon County Sheriff's Dep't, 382 F.3d 700 (jails and sheriff's departments not legal entities separable from counties for §1983)
