Coltin Drew Herzog v. B. Rutkowski, Zach Shifflett, Officer Taylor, and Devin Burton

Summary

The United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana held that Coltin Drew Herzog’s pro se complaint concerning toilet paper, laundry services, hygiene supplies, and oral hygiene items at the DeKalb County Jail failed to state a constitutional claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. The court denied his request for a ruling under Indiana Trial Rule 53.1, granted him until February 9, 2026, to file an amended complaint, and cautioned that failure to do so would result in dismissal.

Holdings

1. The allegations were too vague to state a Fourteenth Amendment claim because Herzog did not describe the jail's distribution process or allege facts showing that the process failed to provide adequate toilet paper.
2. The alleged laundry schedule did not state a constitutional claim.
3. The allegations concerning limited body wash, weekly showers, the absence of washcloths, and the requirement to purchase deodorant did not state a constitutional claim.
4. The allegations concerning the quantity and size of the toothpaste and toothbrush did not state a constitutional claim.
5. Indiana Trial Rule 53.1 did not apply because the case was governed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which contain no equivalent rule requiring action on a motion after thirty days.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the allegations concerning delayed toilet-paper distribution stated a Fourteenth Amendment conditions-of-confinement claim.
2. Whether the alleged weekly laundering of clothing, sheets, towels, and monthly replacement of blankets stated a constitutional claim.
3. Whether the alleged limitations on body wash, showers, washcloths, deodorant, toothbrushes, and toothpaste stated a Fourteenth Amendment claim.
4. Whether Indiana Trial Rule 53.1 applied to the federal case and entitled Herzog to a ruling on his request.

Disposition

other