Summary
This screening order from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin addresses a pro se prisoner’s amended civil rights complaint alleging violations related to denied or opened legal mail. After reviewing the allegations against the standards of 28 U.S.C. § 1915A and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8, the court finds the claims legally insufficient and speculative. Consequently, the court dismisses the action for failure to state a claim and notes that the plaintiff has incurred a strike under the three-strikes rule.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the plaintiff's amended complaint states a plausible claim under 42 U.S.C. §1983 for denial of legal mail.
Holdings
- The complaint fails to state a claim because the plaintiff did not allege sufficient factual matter to show a constitutional injury; the action is dismissed under 28 U.S.C. §§1915(e)(2)(B) and 1915A(b)(1).
Key quotations
“A prisoner suffers no constitutional harm when public documents that “prison officials have as much right to read as the prisoner” or “routine and nonsensitive” nonpublic documents are opened outside the prisoner’s presence.”
“To satisfactorily state a claim for an infringement of the right of access, prisoners must also allege an actual injury.”
Factual background
Lawrence McFarland, a prisoner in the Milwaukee County Jail, alleged that jail officials denied him legal court mail on multiple dates and opened mail outside his presence, but he provided no details about the nature of the mail, who opened it, or any injury suffered.
Procedural history
Plaintiff filed a 42 U.S.C. §1983 complaint alleging denial of legal mail. The court screened the complaint, gave plaintiff an opportunity to amend, plaintiff filed an amended complaint, and the court screened the amended complaint and dismissed the action for failure to state a claim.