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.

Evans v. George W. Hill Correctional Facility

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

August 27, 2019

JERON EVANS, Plaintiff,
v.
GEORGE W. HILL CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, Defendant.

          MEMORANDUM

          KEARNEY, J.

         Jeron Evans pro se sues the George W. Hill Correctional Facility ("Prison"), challenging conditions of his confinement during his recent incarceration. He moves for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. We grant Mr. Evans leave to proceed in forma pauperis. But he cannot proceed as yet as he fails to plead a claim against the Prison for civil rights violations. We dismiss his Complaint against the Prison with leave to amend to possibly allege claims against state actors.

         I. Plead facts.

         Mr. Evans' Complaint is sparse. He alleges the events giving rise to his claims occurred at the Prison between August 26, 2018 and March 10, 2019. He alleges an "inhumane living situation."[1] Mr. Evans does not allege more information. He claims back pain and seeks "compensation for pain suffering."[2] We understand Mr. Evans to be asserting constitutional claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 based on the conditions of his confinement. We have no other alleged facts.

         II. Analysis.

         We grant Mr. Evans leave to proceed in forma pauperis as he is incapable of paying the fees to commence this civil action. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), we must dismiss his Complaint if he fails to plead "sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face."[3] Conclusory allegations do not suffice.[4] As Mr. Evans is proceeding pro se, we construe his allegations liberally.[5]

         "To state a claim under § 1983, a plaintiff must allege the violation of a right secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States, and must show that the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under color of state law."[6] Mr. Evans named the Prison as the only Defendant. His claims against the Prison must be dismissed because the facility "is not a legal entity susceptible to suit."[7] He must sue a person.

         Mr. Evans has also not alleged a constitutional claim. He makes one conclusory allegation, i.e., being subjected to what he describes as an inhumane living situation. Mr. Evans does not allege a fact about the conditions or explain why those conditions rise to the level of a constitutional violation.[8] We dismiss his Complaint. But he may be able to plead a claim. We grant him leave to timely amend with facts against a state actor.

         III. Conclusion

         We grant Mr. Evans leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss his Complaint. We dismiss Mr. Evans' Complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) for failure to state a claim without prejudice to timely filing an amended complaint if he can allege a plausible claim against an appropriate state actor, not the Prison.[9]

---------

Notes:

[1]ECF Doc. No. 2 at 3.


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.