Lavelle Scott v. Latoya Hughes, et al.

Summary

The court conducted merit review under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A of a pro se prisoner’s Eighth Amendment conditions-of-confinement claim. The court found plausible claims against Lieutenant Doolin, Warden Mindi Nurse, and Correctional Officers Lawrance, Good, and Krominga, but dismissed IDOC Director Latoya Hughes based on lack of personal involvement. The court denied the plaintiff’s request for appointed counsel, directed service, and issued related case-management instructions.

Holdings

1. The complaint plausibly alleged an Eighth Amendment claim against Lieutenant Doolin, Warden Mindi Nurse, and Correctional Officers Lawrance, Good, and Krominga because they allegedly knew of the cell conditions and failed to take available corrective action.
2. Scott failed to state a claim against IDOC Director Latoya Hughes because the complaint did not plausibly allege that she knew of and disregarded the conditions in cell SPC 642.
3. The motion to request counsel was denied because Scott had not shown a reasonable attempt to obtain counsel independently and had not indicated that he was effectively precluded from doing so.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Scott's allegations plausibly stated an Eighth Amendment conditions-of-confinement claim against the correctional officers, Lieutenant Doolin, and Warden Mindi Nurse.
2. Whether Scott stated a claim against IDOC Director Latoya Hughes based solely on her supervisory position.
3. Whether Scott was entitled to court assistance in recruiting counsel for the civil-rights action.

Disposition

other