Sean Rose v. Jenkins, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Central District of Illinois conducted a merit review under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A of Sean Rose’s pro se § 1983 complaint. The court allowed Eighth Amendment claims for deliberate indifference to a serious medical need and verbal harassment or humiliation, and a First Amendment retaliation claim against Defendant Jenkins in her individual capacity, while dismissing the warden as a defendant and directing service on Jenkins.

Holdings

1. Rose stated an Eighth Amendment claim for deliberate indifference to a serious medical need against Jenkins in her individual capacity.
2. Rose stated an Eighth Amendment claim against Jenkins based on the alleged verbal harassment and humiliation.
3. Rose stated a First Amendment retaliation claim against Jenkins in her individual capacity based on allegations that Jenkins acted because Rose filed grievances and complained about inadequate medical treatment.
4. Rose failed to state a claim against the warden because he made no allegations against the warden and could not impose liability merely because the warden was in charge.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Rose's allegations stated an Eighth Amendment claim for deliberate indifference to a serious medical need against Jenkins.
2. Whether Rose's allegations of verbal harassment and humiliation stated an Eighth Amendment claim against Jenkins.
3. Whether Rose's allegations that Jenkins retaliated against him for filing grievances and complaining about medical treatment stated a First Amendment retaliation claim.
4. Whether Rose stated a claim against the warden based solely on the warden's supervisory position.

Disposition

other