Peguero-Albuerme v. Pereira-Castillo, No. 3:2008cv01397 - Document 12 (D.P.R. 2009)

Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING 10 MOTION to DISMISS filed by Miguel Pereira-Castillo. Judgment shall enter DISMISSING Plaintiff's complaint, Docket No. 2 , WITH PREJUDICE, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Signed by Chief Judge Jose A Fuste on 3/23/09.(mrj)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO JUAN M. PEGUERO-ALBUERME, Plaintiff, Civil No. 08-1397 (JAF) v. MIGUEL PEREIRA-CASTILLO, Defendant. OPINION AND ORDER 10 11 Plaintiff Juan M. Peguero-Albuerme brings this action against 12 Defendant Miguel Pereira-Castillo, the Puerto Rico Administrator of 13 Corrections ( Administrator ), under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that 14 Defendant has subjected Plaintiff to harsh prison conditions. Docket 15 Nos. 2, 6. Plaintiff seeks monetary damages. Id. Defendant moves for 16 dismissal pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 17 12(b)(6). Docket No. 10. The motion is unopposed. 18 I. 19 Factual and Procedural Synopsis 20 We draw the following facts from Plaintiff s complaint. Docket 21 Nos. 2, 6. In considering a motion to dismiss, we assume that the 22 factual averments in the complaint are true and draw all plausible 23 inferences in the plaintiff s favor. Berner v. Delahanty, 129 F.3d 24 20, 23 (1st Cir. 1997). 25 Plaintiff is an inmate at Guayama in the penal custody of the 26 Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. Plaintiff has suffered physical and Civil No. 08-1397 (JAF) -2- 1 psychological injury from (1) illumination from lighting fixtures, 2 (2) uncomfortable seating at table and within his cell, (3) low 3 temperatures within his cell, (4) inability to exercise without 4 complying 5 (5) unhygienic prison meals, (6) dangerous vapors from floor wax used 6 in 7 evacuation 8 library, (9) fumes released by drying paint in a common space in the 9 prison ward, (10) exposure to nude fellow prisoners in the common 10 shower, (11) risk of falling from an upper bunk bed, and (12) risk of 11 contagion from inadequately washed prison uniforms. Plaintiff states 12 without 13 remedies. the with a dress corridors, (7) procedures, elaboration code imposed inadequate (8) that fire distracting he has by a prison suppression lighting exhausted his in official, systems the and prison administrative 14 Plaintiff filed this case in federal court on April 2, 2008, 15 seeking monetary compensation. Docket No. 2. On July 24, 2008, 16 Defendant moved to dismiss under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 17 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6), Docket No. 10; Plaintiff has not opposed. 18 II. 19 Standard under Rule 12(b)(6) 20 A defendant may move to dismiss an action against him, based 21 solely on the complaint, for the plaintiff s failure to state a 22 claim upon which relief can be granted. Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). 23 In assessing this motion, [w]e begin by accepting all well-pleaded 24 facts as true, and we draw all reasonable inferences in favor of the Civil No. 08-1397 (JAF) -3- 1 [plaintiff]. Wash. Legal Found. v. Mass. Bar Found., 993 F.2d 962, 2 971 (1st Cir. 1993). We then determine whether the complaint states 3 a legally cognizable demand for relief. 4 The complaint must demonstrate a plausible entitlement to 5 relief by alleging facts that directly or inferentially support each 6 material element of some legal claim. Gagliardi v. Sullivan, 513 F.3d 7 301, 305 (1st Cir. 2008) (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 8 U.S. 544, 559 (2007)). [S]pecific facts are not necessary; the 9 statements need only give the defendants fair notice of [the claim] 10 and the grounds upon which it rests. Thomas v. Rhode Island, 542 11 F.3d 944, 948 (1st Cir. 2008) (quoting Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 12 89 (2007)). 13 III. 14 Analysis 15 Defendant moves for dismissal for Plaintiff s failure to 16 attribute alleged defects at Guayama to Defendant. Docket No. 10. We 17 agree that supervisory liability does not attach to Defendant. 18 To establish supervisory liability under § 1983, a plaintiff 19 must demonstrate the 20 omissions. Whitfield v. Melendez-Rivera, 431 F.3d 1, 14 (1st Cir. 21 2005). 22 supervisor s direct participation in a constitutional violation, or 23 (2) 24 authorization of illegal conduct. Id. Under the latter approach, a Accordingly, conduct by the a supervisor s plaintiff supervisor fault must that for his establish is own either tantamount acts (1) to or the tacit Civil No. 08-1397 (JAF) 1 plaintiff 2 subordinate 3 supervisor s acts or omissions were affirmatively linked to the 4 subordinate s conduct 5 encouragement, acquiescence, 6 deliberate indifference. Id. The Administrator may suffer supervisory 7 liability 8 statutes. See Cristóbal-Miranda v. Giménez-Muñoz, 770 F.2d 255, 260- 9 61 (1st Cir. 1985) (citing Administrator s powers under 4 L.P.R.A. 10 must show -4- caused for his that a (a) the conduct constitutional such neglect that of or it gross duties of the violation, supervisor s and constituted negligence enumerated in (b) the supervisory amounting Puerto to Rico § 1112(f) (1978)). 11 There is nothing in the complaint which suggests that Defendant 12 is personally involved in the day-to-day operations of the prison at 13 Guayama. See Docket No. 2. Thus, Plaintiff has failed to state a case 14 for direct participation. See Whitfield, 431 F.3d at 14. 15 At the same time, Puerto Rico law does not command Defendant to 16 exercise direct supervision over any of the alleged deficiencies at 17 Guayama. See 4 L.P.R.A. §§ 1112-13 (2005). Furthermore, Plaintiff has 18 not attributed specific acts or omissions to any subordinate of 19 Defendant at Guayama for the bulk of his complaints. See id. The only 20 exception is the unnamed official responsible for the dress code for 21 physical exercise. See id. Plaintiff does not allege, however, that 22 Defendant is personally responsible for, or turned a blind eye 23 toward, the dress code. See id. 24 Having failed to allege Defendant s dereliction of statutory 25 duty with respect to conditions at Guayama, actors responsible for Civil No. 08-1397 (JAF) -5- 1 the alleged violations, or Defendant s involvement with the dress 2 code for physical exercise, Plaintiff cannot establish Defendant s 3 tacit authorization. See Whitfield, 431 F.3d at 14. 4 As we dismiss for Plaintiff s failure to state a claim for 5 supervisory liability, we need not address Defendant s arguments for 6 failure 7 qualified immunity, and lack of standing. See Docket No. 10. to exhaust administrative remedies, 8 immunity, IV. 9 sovereign Conclusion 10 Accordingly, we hereby GRANT Defendant s motion to dismiss, 11 Docket No. 10. We DISMISS Plaintiff s complaint, Docket No. 2, WITH 12 PREJUDICE, pursuant to Federal Rule of Procedure 12(b)(6). 13 IT IS SO ORDERED. 14 San Juan, Puerto Rico, this 23rd day of March, 2009. 15 16 17 s/José Antonio Fusté JOSE ANTONIO FUSTE Chief U.S. District Judge

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.