Darrell Hardin v. Unknown Lang, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri grants Darrell Hardin leave to proceed in forma pauperis and assesses an initial partial filing fee of $23.72. The court concludes that his civil-rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 is incomplete and fails to state a plausible claim, but permits him to file an amended complaint within thirty days. The court denies his motion for appointment of counsel without prejudice.

Holdings

1. The complaint failed to plead enough facts to state a plausible claim for relief, but Plaintiff was granted leave to file an amended complaint.
2. Allegations that Defendants Lang and Fulcher applied handcuffs too tightly and caused cuff marks, without more, were insufficient to state an excessive-force claim.
3. Defendant Hancock could not be held liable under § 1983 merely because he was the acting shift commander.
4. The complaint failed to state a claim against Defendants Harden and Walls because it alleged only that Plaintiff told them his handcuffs were too tight and did not identify any action, inaction, or resulting injury.
5. Appointment of counsel was not warranted at that stage, and the motion was denied without prejudice.
6. Plaintiff was granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis and assessed an initial partial filing fee of $23.72.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the complaint stated a plausible claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 sufficient to survive mandatory initial review under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).
2. Whether allegations of tight handcuffs and wrist marks plausibly established excessive force.
3. Whether the complaint stated claims against defendants based only on supervisory status or on receiving a complaint without alleged personal involvement.
4. Whether Plaintiff should be permitted to amend his pro se complaint.
5. Whether appointment of counsel was warranted at the initial stage of the case.
6. How filing fees should be assessed under the Prison Litigation Reform Act.

Disposition

other