Searching over 5,500,000 cases.

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.

Taylor v. Scott

United States District Court, S.D. New York

January 17, 2018

CLEON TAYLOR, Plaintiff,


          Vincent L. Briccetti United States District Judge.

         Plaintiff Cleon Taylor, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, brings this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging defendants C.O. Scott, C.O. Rosier, Deputy O'Neill, Captain Melville, and C.O. Giess violated his rights under the Eighth Amendment.

         Now pending is defendants' unopposed motion to dismiss the amended complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6). (Doc. #29).

         For the reasons set forth below, defendants' motion is GRANTED.

         The Court has subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331.


         In deciding the pending motion to dismiss, the Court accepts as true all well-pleaded factual allegations in the amended complaint and draws all reasonable inferences in plaintiff's favor, as summarized below.

         At all relevant times, plaintiff was incarcerated at Green Haven Correctional Facility.

         At 6:30 a.m. on September 15, 2014, plaintiff asked C.O. Rosier for a plunger because plaintiff's toilet was clogged with human waste. C.O. Rosier responded that the facility was on lockdown for a facility-wide search. C.O. Rosier passed plaintiff's cell six or seven times throughout the day. Plaintiff requested the plunger each time but Rosier never provided the plunger to plaintiff.

         At 11:30 a.m. on September 15, 2014, C.O. Scott came to plaintiff's cell to ask if he needed medication. Plaintiff responded that he did not need medication but he did need a plunger to unclog his toilet. Plaintiff then showed C.O. Scott the clogged toilet, which plaintiff had covered with a towel. C.O. Scott continued his rounds. Plaintiff asked him for the plunger on other occasions that day. At 6:30 p.m., upon returning from the medical clinic, plaintiff again asked C.O. Scott for a plunger “because [his] toilet [wa]s filled with even more feces.” (Am. Compl. ¶ 11). C.O. Scott told plaintiff to go to his cell and lock in. Plaintiff did not receive a plunger from C.O. Scott.

         At 8:30 a.m. on September 16, 2014, plaintiff stopped C.O. Hayden and asked him for a plunger for the clogged toilet. Two hours later, plaintiff heard C.O. Hayden talking to another inmate two floors below plaintiff's cell. Plaintiff yelled to C.O. Hayden to ask for a plunger, but Hayden did not reply.

         At 6:30 p.m. on September 16, 2014, while plaintiff was returning to his cell from the clinic, he saw C.O. Scott. Plaintiff asked him, “Why was I not allowed to use the plunger and could I use it now[?]” (Am. Compl. ¶ 16). C.O. Scott answered that plaintiff could not use the plunger and that “[h]e was ordered by his captain not to give the plunger to any inmates.” (Id.).

         At 8:00 a.m. on September 17, 2014, plaintiff stopped C.O. Giess, explained to him that he had no flushing toilet for over forty-eight hours, and asked him for a plunger. At 11:30 a.m. C.O. Giess again passed by plaintiff's cell. Plaintiff asked him if he had forgotten about the plunger. C.O. Giess responded that he had not forgotten and that he had told the “A station officer.” (Am. Compl. ¶ 18). Plaintiff then asked C.O. Giess if he could go to sick call because he was dizzy and having difficulty breathing. C.O. Giess said he would let the A officer know of the request. Thereafter, around 12:30 p.m., plaintiff told a different corrections officer that he had asked to go to sick call and added that he wanted to speak to a sergeant. The corrections officer denied those requests.

         On September 17, 2014, at 7:00 p.m., plaintiff stopped Deputy O'Neill as he was walking by plaintiff's cell. Plaintiff explained to Deputy O'Neill that plaintiff's toilet had been clogged for over forty-eight hours and told him the difficulty he had had trying to get a plunger. Specifically, plaintiff told Deputy O'Neill that C.O. Scott told plaintiff, “[t]he Captain ordered him not to give out the plunger to [any] inmates.” (Am. Compl. ¶ 21). Captain Melville was nearby, so Deputy O'Neill asked him whether he had told C.O. Scott not to give out plungers to inmates. Captain Melville said, “No, if any[]thing I would tell the officer[]s to go ahead and give out the plunger to those inmate[]s who need[] it, because the inmates cannot come out of their cell to get it [themselves].” (Id. ¶ 22). Both Deputy O'Neill and Captain Melville assured plaintiff he would receive a plunger.

         Plaintiff did not receive a plunger until the following day, September ...

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.