Albert S. Kelly, a/k/a Albert S. Kelley, a/k/a Albert Santanieo Kelley, a/k/a Albert Santanieyo Kelley v. Stanley Terry, Warden Palmer, Lt. Cox Cert. Team, Willy Davis

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of South Carolina adopts a magistrate judge’s recommendation and dismisses without prejudice a pro se prisoner’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for failure to allege facts connecting the named defendants to an Eighth Amendment violation. The court also imposes a narrowly tailored prefiling injunction requiring the plaintiff to submit complete complaint, fee or in forma pauperis, and service documents before commencing a new pro se civil action in the District.

Holdings

1. The complaint failed to state a claim because it did not provide factual content permitting a reasonable inference that any named defendant personally violated Plaintiff's constitutional rights or had an affirmative causal connection to the alleged deprivation.
2. Dismissal without prejudice without granting another opportunity to amend was appropriate because Plaintiff had repeatedly failed to comply with orders requiring proper complaint forms, in forma pauperis documents, and other threshold filings, and no objection identified additional facts that could cure the pleading defects.
3. A limited prefiling injunction was warranted because Plaintiff had continuously abused the judicial process through repeated incomplete, duplicative, and noncompliant filings, lesser sanctions had been inadequate, and the restriction was narrowly tailored.
4. The court adopted the report and recommendation after finding no clear error on the face of the record because Plaintiff filed no specific objections.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the complaint should be dismissed at initial review because it did not allege facts showing personal involvement or an affirmative causal connection between any named defendant and a constitutional deprivation.
2. Whether the court could dismiss without first granting another opportunity to amend.
3. Whether a narrowly tailored prefiling injunction was warranted based on Plaintiff's repeated filing of incomplete, duplicative, or noncompliant actions.

Disposition

dismissed