From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Orr v. Brown

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA SOUTH BEND DIVISION
Jul 9, 2018
CAUSE NO. 3:18CV279-PPS (N.D. Ind. Jul. 9, 2018)

Opinion

CAUSE NO. 3:18CV279-PPS

07-09-2018

MICHAEL ORR, Plaintiff, v. OFFICER BROWN, Defendant.


OPINION AND ORDER

Michael Orr, a pro se prisoner, filed a complaint alleging that Officer Brown used excessive force against him at the Westville Correctional Facility on August 19, 2016. ECF 2. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, I must review a prisoner complaint and dismiss it if the action is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief. Under federal pleadings standards, the plaintiff "must do better than putting a few words on paper that, in the hands of an imaginative reader, might suggest that something has happened to [him] that might be redressed by the law." Swanson v. Citibank, N.A., 614 F.3d 400, 403 (7th Cir. 2010) (emphasis in original). Instead, the plaintiff must provide sufficient factual matter to state a claim that is plausible on its face. Ray v. City of Chicago, 629 F.3d 660, 662-63 (7th Cir. 2011).

The complaint alleges the following. On August 19, 2016, Orr handed his empty lunch tray to Officer Brown through the cuff port of his cell door. Without any reason or justification, Officer Brown grabbed Orr's right arm while it was in the cuff port and "smashed, twisted, grinded, cut, and sliced Plaintiff's arm against the cuff-port's sharp metal edges." ECF 2 at 3. During this incident, Officer Brown was bragging that he was about to break Orr's arm. Another guard eventually arrived and stopped Officer Brown from doing any more harm. Orr sues Officer Brown for money damages.

The "core requirement" for an excessive force claim is that the defendant "used force not in a good-faith effort to maintain or restore discipline, but maliciously and sadistically to cause harm." Hendrickson v. Cooper, 589 F.3d 887, 890 (7th Cir. 2009) (internal citation omitted). "[T]he question whether the measure taken inflicted unnecessary and wanton pain and suffering ultimately turns on whether force was applied in a good faith effort to maintain or restore discipline or maliciously and sadistically for the very purpose of causing harm." Whitley v. Albers, 475 U.S. 312, 320-21 (1986) (quotation marks and citation omitted). Orr claims that Officer Brown injured his right arm maliciously to cause him harm. This is sufficient to state a claim against Officer Brown for use of excessive force in violation of the Eighth Amendment and thus Orr may proceed against him.

ACCORDINGLY:

(1) Orr is GRANTED leave to proceed against Officer Brown in his individual capacity for monetary damages for using excessive force against him on August 19, 2016, in violation of the Eighth Amendment;

(2) all other claims are DISMISSED;

(3) the clerk and the United States Marshals Service are DIRECTED to issue and serve process on Officer Brown at the Indiana Department of Correction with a copy of this order and the complaint (ECF 2) as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d); and

(4) Officer Brown is ORDERED to respond, as provided for in the FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE and N.D. IND. L.R. 10.1, only to the claim for which the pro se plaintiff has been granted leave to proceed in this screening order.

SO ORDERED on July 9, 2018.

/s/ Philip P. Simon

Judge

United States District Court


Summaries of

Orr v. Brown

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA SOUTH BEND DIVISION
Jul 9, 2018
CAUSE NO. 3:18CV279-PPS (N.D. Ind. Jul. 9, 2018)
Case details for

Orr v. Brown

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL ORR, Plaintiff, v. OFFICER BROWN, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA SOUTH BEND DIVISION

Date published: Jul 9, 2018

Citations

CAUSE NO. 3:18CV279-PPS (N.D. Ind. Jul. 9, 2018)