Reynolds v. Myers
Reynolds v. Myers
Trial Court Opinion
a UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA ALEXANDRIA DIVISION
DASHONE MARCEL REYNOLDS CIVIL DOCKET NO. 1:23-CV-00057 #704241, SEC P Plaintiff
VERSUS JUDGE TERRY A. DOUGHTY
MARCUS MYERS ET AL, MAGISTRATE JUDGE PEREZ-MONTES Defendants
MEMORANDUM ORDER Before the Court is a civil rights Complaint filed under
42 U.S.C. § 1983by pro se Plaintiff Dashone Marcel Reynolds (“Reynolds”). Reynolds is incarcerated at the Raymond Laborde Correctional Center (“RLCC”) in Cottonport, Louisiana. He names as Defendants Warden Marcus Myers and Deputy Warden Keith Turner. To determine if Raymond is entitled to relief, he must AMEND the Complaint. I. Background Raymond alleges that Defendants “tampered with” his legal mail when he arrived at RLCC. ECF No. 3 at 3. He informed a deputy that he was missing certain items but was “denied administrative relief.” Raymond also alleges that his hair was cut despite his intake sheet indicating he was Muslim. II. Law and Analysis Pursuant to Rule 8(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a pleading must contain a “short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is
entitled to relief.” The pleading standard that Rule 8 announces does not require “detailed factual allegations,” but demands more than an “unadorned, the-defendant- unlawfully-harmed-me accusation.” ,
129 S.Ct. 1937(2009) (citations omitted). A pleading that offers “labels and conclusions” or “a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do.” ,
550 U.S. 544, 555(2007).
Raymond seeks monetary damages, but he does not allege how each Defendant violated his constitutional rights or what injury he suffered. Thus, Raymond must amend and state: (1) the name of EACH person who allegedly violated his constitutional rights;
(2) a description of what EACH Defendant did to violate his rights;
(3) the date(s) that EACH alleged violation occurred;
(4) a description of the injury sustained from EACH alleged violation.
III. Conclusion Because Raymond must provide additional information to support his claims, IT IS ORDERED that he AMEND the Complaint within 30 days of the date of this Order. Failure to comply with this Order may result in dismissal of this action under Rule 41(b) or 16(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Petitioner is further required to notify the Court of any change in his address under Rule 41.3 of the Local Rules for the Western District of Louisiana. SIGNED on Wednesday, May 31, 2023. fe Ret il JOSEPH H.1L. PEREZ-MONTES UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Reference
- Status
- Unknown