GLENN D. ODOM, II, Plaintiff
VICTORIA P. LYNN et al., Defendants
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THOMAS B. RUSSELL, Senior District Judge.
Plaintiff Glenn D. Odom, II, filed the instant pro se 28 U.S.C. § 1983 action proceeding in forma pauperis . This matter is before the Court on the initial review pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Upon review, the Court will allow some of Plaintiff's claims to proceed and will dismiss others.
Plaintiff is an inmate at the Kentucky State Penitentiary (KSP). Defendants are employees or officers of KSP. He sues the following Defendants in their individual capacities only: Troy Belt, whom he identifies as "Committee chairman of disciplinary/Captain"; Josh Patton, disciplinary member; Hillary Poole, disciplinary member; Victoria P. Lynn, Case Worker; and Skyla Grief, Grievance Coordinator. He also sues Duke Pettit, identified as "Dep. Warden/Programs[, ]" and Warden Randy White in their official capacities only. He sues Bruce Von Dwingelo, identified as "Seg. Unit Administrator, " in both his individual and official capacities.
As an initial matter, Plaintiff attached to his complaint over one hundred pages of exhibits and later filed additional exhibits. For the purposes of initial review, the Court is not required to wade through lengthy exhibits to find support for Plaintiff's claims. See Jinadu v. Fitzgerald , No. 99-4259, 2000 U.S.App. LEXIS 23650, at *3-4 (6th Cir. Sept. 15, 2000) ("The district court's duty to construe Jinadu's pro se pleadings liberally did not obligate it to analyze attachments to Jinadu's complaint in order to speculate about the claims Jinadu may be attempting to bring."); Young Bey v. McGinnis , No. 98-1930, 1999 U.S.App. LEXIS 23676, at *4 (6th Cir. Sept. 23, 1999) ("[The plaintiff] refers the court to an attachment consisting of a minimum of fifty pages. The district court's duty to construe Young Bey's pro se pleadings liberally did not obligate it to analyze attachments to Young Bey's complaint in order to speculate about the claims Young Bey may be attempting to bring."). It is Plaintiff's responsibility to allege the facts supporting his claims in the body of his complaint.
Plaintiff states in the complaint that Defendant Von Dwingelo told him, "If you pi** me off, I'll make your life a living hell!'" He states that he has been the subject of "harassment, retaliation, and reprisals" from Defendants Lynn and Von Dwingelo. He avers that Defendant Lynn refuses to notarize his documents if she does not like what they contain and that she "claims that Warden White and Dwingelo has authorized her to read Odom's affidavits, outgoing legal mail, and etc.-and to refuse Odom notary if she wants to." Plaintiff reports that Defendant Lynn often refuses to give him legal forms. He further contends that Defendant Lynn placed false major disciplinary charges on him as retaliation for him asking for a grievance form. He states that she had alleged that "plaintiff masturbated (in his suicide-watch camera cell) towards her seven (7) days prior??? When the committee checked the camera they CLEARLY held this allegation to be impossible.'" (Emphasis in original.) He further states that several times Defendant Lynn refused to return his affidavits and he had to "file complaints" for their return.
Plaintiff further states that Defendant Lynn "is intentionally keeping plaintiff as a maxium security inmate although he has been none-max since Sept. 9th, 2012." He avers that Defendant Lynn "once denied plaintiff an opportunity to call his civil attorney just because the atty. was civil." He states the Defendants Lynn and Von Dwingelo refuse to allow him "to switch out his legal material sometimes, even though plaintiff shows Lynn deadlines from several federal judges." He also states that he once had to wait fifty days to receive his 18 inches of legal property because Defendants Lynn and Von Dwingelo claimed it was lost. He also claims that Defendant Lynn refuses to mail his legal mail "for any tiny or false reason" and once stated that he was too loud. He also states that Defendant Lynn "once got mad because I asked her to stop reading the mail (in front of my face) so she just got upset and walked off - refusing to mail my legal mail."
Plaintiff states that he has written Defendant Lynn's supervisor, Defendant Von Dwingelo, about Lynn's treatment of him, but that Von Dwingelo "allows and encourages the continuation of such" and orders Lynn "to write him up for false reasons to cover her tracks of refusing to mail my legal mail." He also avers that Defendants Von Dwingelo and Lynn refuse to let him view a CD of x-rays which he needs to view to meet a federal deadline. He states that they will not allow him to write the governor or commissioner if it is about them. He states that he then has to sell food to buy a stamp.
Plaintiff further contends that Defendants Lynn and Von Dwingelo refuse to give him addresses that he needs to litigate his federal case. He states that he asked Defendant Lynn to call the Jefferson County Court Clerk "because I wrote them but they gave me a vague reply." He states he has a deadline in his life sentence appeal and a dire need for her to call. He claims that Defendant Lynn gave his request to Defendant Von Dwingelo and "he denied me out of hatred-of course." He states that he asked his "neighbor" to make the exact same request and that Defendant Lynn called the Clerk for the neighbor. Plaintiff alleges that this is retaliation.
Plaintiff further avers that Defendant Lynn is intentionally "telling my business out loud over the range saying Oh, your talking about that one case where you told on those Indiana guys for breaking your bones?' This is causing inmates to call me rats and snitches." He states that Defendant Lynn told another inmate "to teach me a lesson" while inmates were outside on recreation but that the other inmate replied, "I don't even know him.'" He states that Defendant Von Dwingelo yells and screams at him and "when other inmates started complaining he told him that I needed to learn that this is prison." He states that "hours later, " he had his mother call Frankfort to report that Defendants Lynn and Von Dwingelo were causing him unsafe conditions and that Von Dwingelo moved him downstairs, which is still in Von Dwingelo's segregation unit. Plaintiff reports that when Defendant Lynn brought Plaintiff his legal property, he "politely refused and explained that [he] felt threatened" by Lynn and Von Dwingelo. He states that Defendant Lynn again said that he "told on" on inmates in Indiana. Plaintiff states, "Now inmates on this walk are calling me rats and snitches and we have large holes in our walls to where each neighbor can easily throw urine, feces, or spit on me." He contends that he "will surely be assaulted at any moment because inmates upstairs are yelling down here through the vents saying that I'm a check-in and C.T.O. Lynn said that I told on Indiana inmates." He states that he has contacted LaDonna Thompson and Ombudsman John Dunn, filed grievances, and told Internal Affairs officer Doinne Hardin that he will be attacked in 3 cellhouse. He states that "K.S.P. officials laughed at me and loves to see certain' inmates attacked."
Plaintiff also states that Defendants Poole, Belt, and Patton "literally had no reason to find me guilty of Victoria Lynn's write up. Dwingelo made it to where they upheld this frivolous write up." He further states, "During all relevant times in this action Skyla Grief was Grievance Coordinator and she deliberately trashed, tampered, obstructed, and rejected my grievances to help her close friends. I been on grievance restriction since 2011 for no reason."
Further, Plaintiff contends that Defendants White and Pettit were notified numerous times of the actions of Defendants Lynn, Grief, and Von Dwingelo. He states that they "upheld all misconduct and ignored plaintiff's request to be kept safe from Dwingelo's and Victoria Lynn's assault trap.'"
As relief, Plaintiff seeks punitive damages and injunctive relief in the form of ordering Defendants White, Pettit, and Von Dwingelo "to remove plaintiff from 3 cellhouse-which he faces an imminent attack" and ordering Defendants White, Pettit, and Von Dwingelo "to allow plaintiff legal address to meet his federal deadlines."
When a prisoner initiates a civil action seeking redress from a governmental entity, officer, or employee, the trial court must review the complaint and dismiss the complaint, or any portion of it, if the court determines that the complaint is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915A(b)(1), (2); McGore v. ...