Johnson v. Salmon et al, No. 7:2021cv00504 - Document 8 (W.D. Va. 2022)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Thomas T. Cullen on 3/14/2022. (Opinion mailed to Pro Se Party via US Mail)(tvt)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Johnson v. Salmon et al Case 7:21-cv-00504-TTC-RSB Document 8 Filed 03/14/22 Page 1 of 2 Pageid#: 44 Doc. 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ROANOKE DIVISION JOSEPH PAUL JOHNSON, ) ) Plaintiff, ) Civil Action No. 7:21cv00504 ) v. ) MEMORANDUM OPINION ) JOSHUA SALMON, et al., ) By: Hon. Thomas T. Cullen ) United States District Judge Defendants. ) ________________________________________________________________________ Plaintiff Joseph Paul Johnson, a Virginia inmate proceeding pro se, filed this civil action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, against Joshua Salmon and the Amherst County Adult Detention Center (“ACADC”). Johnson seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis with this action. Having reviewed Johnson’s complaint and financial documents, the court grants his request to proceed in forma pauperis but concludes that Johnson fails to state a cognizable federal claim against either of the named defendants. Therefore, the court will dismiss Johnson’s complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). Johnson alleges that “ACADC medical is refusing to provide a c-pap [machine] for [his] sleep apnea,” that it “takes several months to be seen by mental health,” and that “healthcare is inadequate.” (Compl. ¶ E [ECF No. 1].) As relief, Johnson seeks “punitive damages and [an] expedited transfer” to a Virginia Department of Corrections facility. (Id. ¶ F.) The court previously advised Johnson that his complaint failed to state a claim against the named defendants and gave him the opportunity to file an amended complaint. (See ECF No. 7.) Johnson did not respond to the court’s order. Dockets.Justia.com Case 7:21-cv-00504-TTC-RSB Document 8 Filed 03/14/22 Page 2 of 2 Pageid#: 45 To state a cause of action under § 1983, a plaintiff must allege facts indicating that he has been deprived of rights guaranteed by the Constitution or laws of the United States and that this deprivation resulted from conduct committed by a person acting under color of state law. West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42 (1988). Because a detention center is not a legal entity, it is not a “person” subject to suit under § 1983 and Johnson cannot maintain this action against the defendant ACADC. See McCoy v. Chesapeake Corr. Ctr., 788 F. Supp. 890, 894 (E.D. Va. 1992). To state a cognizable Eighth Amendment claim for denial of medical care, a plaintiff must allege facts sufficient to demonstrate that an official was deliberately indifferent to a serious medical need. Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 105 (1976); Conner v. Donnelly, 42 F.3d 220, 222 (4th Cir. 1994); Staples v. Va. Dep’t of Corr., 904 F. Supp. 487, 492 (E.D. Va. 1995). Despite being given the opportunity to amend his complaint, Johnson has not alleged sufficient facts for the court to determine that defendant Salmon was deliberately indifferent to any serious medical need. In fact, Johnson fails to allege any facts against Salmon. Therefore, the court concludes that Johnson has failed to state a cognizable claim against Salmon. For the reasons stated, the court will dismiss this action under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) for failure to state a claim. The clerk is directed to forward a copy of this Memorandum Opinion and accompanying Order to Johnson. ENTERED this 14th day of March, 2022. /s/ Thomas T. Cullen____________________ HON. THOMAS T. CULLEN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE -2-
]]>
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.
