Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Oguntunji Adesola v. County of Nassau Sheriff's Dept

March 13, 2012

OGUNTUNJI ADESOLA, PLAINTIFF,
v.
COUNTY OF NASSAU SHERIFF'S DEPT, NASSAU COUNTY CORRECTIONAL CENTER, JOHN DOE'S (UNKNOWN), DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Seybert, District Judge:

ORDER

Pending before the Court is incarcerated pro se plaintiff Oguntunji Adesola's ("Adesola") Complaint brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the County of Nassau Sheriff's Department, the Nassau County Correctional Center and "John Doe's (unknown)." The Complaint is accompanied by an application to proceed in forma pauperis. Upon review of Plaintiff's declaration in support of the application, the Court finds that Plaintiff's financial status qualifies him to file this action without prepayment of the filing fee. Accordingly, the application to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. However, for the reasons that follow, the Complaint is sua sponte dismissed in part pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e) (2)(B)(i)-(ii); 1915A(b). Plaintiff's remaining claims shall proceed.

BACKGROUND

Plaintiff's brief, handwritten Complaint, submitted on the Court's Section 1983 complaint form, alleges that, while incarcerated at the Nassau County Correctional Center "at or about 1 pm 1/1/12 Location E2-A37 while I was laying in my bed . . . I was jumped and assaulted by unidentified inmates for no reason . . . ." Compl. at ¶ IV. Plaintiff claims that he "was deprived of equal protection under the law by the law where the C.O.s guards here failed to provide adequate protection and there was [sic] no guards on his or her point." Id. According to Plaintiff, "[i]f an officer or guards [sic] was at his or her post at that time the cell open[ed], it may ha[ve] prevented my serious incident. . . ." Id. Plaintiff also includes in his Complaint "poor prison conditions, cells cold, no heat in the cells, the showers are freezing, inadequate medical care, lack of medical attention."

As a result of the alleged assault, Plaintiff claims that he "suffered broken facial bones in my eyes, lacerations to the face, head and arms." Compl. at ¶ IV.A. Additionally, Plaintiff describes that "my eyes socket was damaged and migraine, headache, mental anguish, night mares [sic]. I'm afraid here cause they lack of security." Id. Plaintiff seeks to recover two million dollars ($2 million) in "monetary damages for violations of my rights, privileges and immunities . . . ." Compl. at ¶ V. Plaintiff also seeks unspecified injunctive relief. Id.

DISCUSSION

I. In Forma Pauperis Application

Upon review of Plaintiff's declaration in support of his

application to proceed in forma pauperis, the Court determines that Plaintiff's financial status qualifies him to commence this action without prepayment of the filing fees. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). Therefore, Plaintiff's request to proceed in forma pauperis is granted.

II. Application of 28 U.S.C. § 1915

Section 1915 of Title 28 requires a district court to

dismiss an in forma pauperis complaint if the action is frivolous or malicious; fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(i-iii); 1915A(b). The Court is required to dismiss the action as soon as it makes such a determination. See id.

Courts are obliged to construe the pleadings of a pro se plaintiff liberally. Sealed Plaintiff v. Sealed Defendant, 537 F.3d 185, 191 (2d Cir. 2008); McEachin v. McGuinnis, 357 F.3d 197, 200 (2d Cir. 2004). Moreover, at the pleadings stage of the proceeding, the Court must assume the truth of "all well-pleaded, nonconclusory factual allegations" in the complaint. Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co., 621 F.3d 111, 123 (2d Cir. 2010) (citing Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 1949--50, 173 L. Ed. 2d 868 (2009). However, a complaint must plead sufficient facts to "state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 127 S. Ct. 1955, 1974, 167 L. Ed. 2d 929 (2007). "A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged." Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. at 1949 (citations omitted). ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.