King v. Quigley, CIVIL ACTION NO. 18-CV-5312

• Decision Date: 31 January 2019
• Docket Number: CIVIL ACTION NO. 18-CV-5312
• Citation: King v. Quigley, CIVIL ACTION NO. 18-CV-5312 (E.D. Pa. Jan 31, 2019)
• Parties: DERRICK KING, Plaintiff, v. WARDEN J. QUIGLEY, et al., Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania

DERRICK KING, Plaintiff, v. WARDEN J. QUIGLEY, et al., Defendants.

CIVIL ACTION NO. 18-CV-5312

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

FILED: February 1, 2019

JANUARY 31, 2019

MEMORANDUM

JONES, J.

On December 10, 2018, pro se Plaintiff Derrick King, who is currently incarcerated in the Berks County Jail System, filed this civil action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Warden J. Quigley, Deputy Warden Smith, and ICC Jessica Collins. (ECF No. 1.) He also filed two Motions for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. (ECF Nos. 4, 6.) By Memorandum and Order entered on January 11, 2019, the Court granted King leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissed his Complaint. (ECF Nos. 8, 9.) Specifically, the Court noted that: (1) King had failed to state a due process claim regarding his placement in disciplinary segregation; (2) King had not stated a claim under both the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments regarding the conditions in disciplinary segregation; (3) King had no due process right to be transferred or incarcerated in a particular institution; and (4) King had failed to plausibly allege that Warden Quigley and Deputy Warden Smith had failed to stop subordinate staff members from retaliating against him for engaging in constitutionally protected conduct. (ECF No. 8 at 3-8.) The Court gave King leave to amend in the event he can set forth a plausible claim for relief.

The Court received King's Amended Complaint on January 28, 2019. (ECF No. 12.) King again sues Warden Quigley, Deputy Warden Smith, and ICC Jessica Collins. He has also filed a Motion for a Preliminary Injunction. (ECF No. 13.) For the following reasons, the Court will dismiss the Amended Complaint and provide King one final opportunity to amend.

I. SUMMARY OF KING'S OTHER LITIGATION IN THIS COURT

To understand the context for the Court's analysis of King's Amended Complaint, the Court provides the following summary of King's other litigation history in this Court.

A. King v. Doherty, Civ. A. No. 16-5962

On November 16, 2016, King filed a Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis and Complaint, raising various claims regarding the conditions of confinement during his 2016 incarceration in the Berks County Jail System. Specifically, King alleged that Officer Doherty had harassed him and written a false disciplinary charge, leading to his placement in disciplinary segregation. King also alleged that he lost his mattress and was forced to eat food loaf for thirty (30) days. By Order entered on January 18, 2018, the Court denied King's Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis without prejudice because he had failed to submit a copy of his inmate account statement. By Order entered on March 14, 2018, the Court dismissed this action without prejudice for failure to prosecute because King had failed to either pay the $400.00 filing fee or submit a copy of his prisoner account statement.

B. King v. Smith, Civ. A. No. 16-6649

On December 27, 2016, King filed a Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis and Complaint, again raising claims regarding the conditions of confinement in the Berks County Jail System. Specifically, King alleged that Officer Dew had falsely charged him with making threats toward officers and that he was forced to be in a cell with horrible plumbing and feces on the ceiling. King also contended that he slipped and fell and never received medical treatment. By Orders entered on January 5, 2017 and February 13, 2017, the Court directed King to eithersubmit $400.00 to the Clerk of Court or, if he wished to proceed in forma pauperis, submit a copy of his inmate account statement. King did not do so. Accordingly, by Order entered on January 18, 2018, the Court dismissed this action for failure to prosecute.

C. King v. Quigley, Civ. A. No. 18-2758

On June 28, 2018, King filed a Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis and a Complaint against Warden Quigley, Deputy Warden Smith, Captain Castro, and Sgt. Tossone. Shortly thereafter, he filed an Amended Complaint against those individuals. By Memorandum and Order entered on August 24, 2018, the Court granted King leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissed his Complaint and Amended Complaint. Specifically, the Court noted that: (1) King's speculative allegations were insufficient to impose liability against Warden Quigley and Deputy Warden Smith; (2) King had not stated a claim regarding finding bugs in his food on two separate occasions; (3) King could not maintain a claim against Captain Castro based upon his involvement in the grievance process; (4) the practice of requiring inmates to eat in a cell containing a toilet is not a constitutional violation; and (5) King had failed to allege a plausible claim concerning the drinking water and the medical problems he allegedly experienced from drinking it. The Court granted King leave to file a second amended complaint.

King filed his Second Amended Complaint on September 18, 2018, claiming that Captain Castro failed to adequately supervise the kitchen trays because he allowed insects and such to get into the food. King also alleged that the chlorine was added to the drinking water, causing him to experience medical issues. By Order entered on September 28, 2018, the Court directed service of King's Complaint. Proceedings in this matter are still pending.

D. King v. Quigley, Civ. A. No. 18-3420

On August 13, 2018, King filed a Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis and a Complaint against Warden Quigley, Deputy Warden Smith, and C/Os Matthew Luppold and Kieser. By Memorandum and Order entered on September 28, 2018, the Court granted King leave to proceed in forma pauperis, dismissed his claims against Warden Quigley and Deputy Warden Smith because he could not maintain a claim against them based on their involvement in the grievance process, dismissed his verbal harassment claims against C/Os Luppold and Kieser, and allowed his retaliation claims against C/Os Luppold and Kieser to go forward. Proceedings in this matter are still pending.

E. King v. Vanbilliard, Civ. A. No. 18-3962

On September 13, 2018, King filed a Complaint against Hearing Examiner Daniel Vanbilliard and Officer Stephen Dew. He subsequently filed a Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. In his Complaint, King alleged that Vanbilliard had violated his due process rights during a disciplinary hearing by denying him the ability to call witnesses, and that the disciplinary charges were based on false reports by Officer Dew. By Order entered on September 25, 2018, the Court granted King leave to proceed in forma pauperis and directed service of his Complaint. Proceedings in this matter are still pending.

F. King v. Gonzlas, Civ. A. No. 18-5172

On November 30, 2019, King filed a Complaint against Officer Gonzlas, alleging that he had retaliated against him for filing lawsuits. Shortly thereafter, King filed a Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. By Order entered on January 29, 2019, the Court granted King leave to proceed in forma pauperis and directed service of his Complaint. Proceedings in this matter are still pending.

G. King v. Samuels, Civ. A. No. 19-200

On January 14, 2019, King filed a Complaint against Nicole Samuels, a mental health worker, and Sgt. Brandt (misspelled "Brandit"), alleging that they retaliated against him for filing lawsuits. Shortly thereafter, King filed a Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. Proceedings in this matter are pending.

H. King et al. v. Berks Cty. Jail System Supervisor Officials, Civ. A. No. 19-389

On January 25, 2019, King, as well as several other inmates in the Berks County Jail System, filed a Complaint against several Berks County Jail System officials, alleging that they had been subjected to unconstitutional strip searches. They also alleged that they, as disciplinary segregation inmates, had been subjected to unconstitutional conditions and were prohibited from practicing their religion. Proceedings in this matter are pending.

II. SUMMARY OF THE AMENDED COMPLAINT

Public dockets reflect that on December 6, 2018, King was sentenced to five (5) to ten (10) years of incarceration after being found guilty of being a prohibited person in possession of a firearm. Commonwealth v. King, Docket No. CP-06-CR-0004202-2017 (Berks Cty. Common Pleas). Public dockets also reflect that on October 18, 2018, King was charged with one count of aggravated assault and two counts of simple assault. Commonwealth v. King, Docket No. CP-06-CR-0005008-2018 (Berks Cty. Common Pleas). Proceedings in that matter are still pending. Id. According to King, the assault charges arose from an incident with a correctional officer. (Am. Compl. at 5.)¹ Although King is now a convicted inmate, he alleges that the events giving rise to his claims began on July 3, 2018, when he was still a pretrial detainee. (Id.)

In his Amended Complaint, King challenges his placement in disciplinary segregation, alleging that it affected his sentence because he was unable to conduct legal research and "present a substantial defense." (Id.) He alleges that his inability to conduct legal research violates his equal protection rights, as inmates in general population are permitted to conduct legal research. (Id.) King contends that he has been in disciplinary segregation for over 300 days. (Id. at 6.) He takes issue with the fact that, as a disciplinary segregation inmate, he has been subjected to mattress restrictions, "cold substitute meals," and being forced to clean urine thrown from the top tier to the bottom tier "without any protection supplies, such as gloves." (Id.) King also alleges that as an indigent inmate, he has not been able to make legal phone calls. (Id. at 5.)

King claims that he received "hole time" after being in a fist fight with another inmate. (Id.) Apparently, an officer was hit during the fight, and King was charged with the pending aggravated assault charge. (Id.) King alleges...