Marzett v. Tigner
1:18-cv-00110
W.D. La.Jul 6, 2018Background
- Plaintiff Delmon Marzett, a Louisiana DOC inmate, sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging unconstitutional medical neglect and conditions of confinement while held at Orleans Parish Jail (OPJ) and River Correctional Center (RCC).
- At OPJ Marzett, after knee surgery, was allegedly returned from the hospital in restraints, fell while being transported to court, suffered head/spine injury per MRI, and claims ongoing severe pain; he alleges unaddressed requests for medical care by Sheriff Gusman and transport deputies.
- After transfer to RCC, Marzett alleges failure to provide prescribed diabetic diet, replacement with an inappropriate low-calorie diet by Captain Davis, ten days of lockdown without food/medication, weight loss, and near life-threatening hypoglycemic reactions.
- Marzett alleges an instance of 22-hour transport on a bus restrained without bathroom breaks or food.
- Procedurally, the magistrate screened the in forma pauperis § 1983 complaint under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2) and 1915A, ordered Marzett to amend or dismiss claims against Major Poole, and received an amended complaint dismissing Major Poole.
- The magistrate recommends dismissal with prejudice as to Major Poole, severance and transfer of OPJ-related claims (Sheriff Gusman and transport deputies) to the Eastern District of Louisiana, and continued service against Captain Davis and Warden Libby Tigner.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether allegations against Major Poole state a claim | Marzett originally named Poole but made no factual allegations tying Poole to the alleged violations | Poole lacked any factual involvement; court ordered amendment or dismissal | Court accepted amended complaint; dismissed Major Poole with prejudice |
| Proper venue for OPJ-related claims | OPJ treatment and transport occurred in Orleans Parish; claims should proceed there | Defendants located in Eastern District; venue governed by residence and where events occurred | Claims against Sheriff Gusman and OPJ transport deputies severed and transferred to Eastern District of Louisiana |
| Sufficiency of complaint under screening statutes | Marzett alleges ongoing serious medical needs and deprivation (diet, medication, transport conditions) | Claims subject to sua sponte screening under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2) and 1915A for frivolity or failure to state a claim | Complaint reviewed under Neitzke/Twombly/Iqbal standards; some claims proceed (service to be ordered for Davis and Tigner), others dismissed/transferred |
| Service and continuation of claims against RCC officials | Marzett contends Captain Davis and Warden Tigner violated Eighth Amendment medical and conditions standards at RCC | Defendants will be served where factual allegations against them remain | Magistrate recommends issuing service for Captain Davis and Libby Tigner; claims remain in this court unless further disposition |
Key Cases Cited
- Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319 (complaint is frivolous if it lacks an arguable basis in law or fact)
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (pleading must state a claim that is plausible on its face)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (plausibility standard applies to factual allegations in a complaint)
- Martin v. Scott, 156 F.3d 578 (prisoner § 1983 complaints are subject to screening under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A)