Ryan Darley Maughan v. Salt Lake County Jail

Salt Lake City, Utah Pro Se Plaintiff without a lawyer filed a civil rights lawsuit against the Salt Lake County Metro Jail





Complaint:



(a) lumps together Defendants' allegedly unconstitutional behaviors, instead of separately affirmatively linking each individual defendant to each dated and specific individual allegation of a civil-rights violation. (See below.)



(b) does not adequately state a claim of improper medical treatment. (See below.)



(c) improperly names Salt Lake County Jail as a § 1983 defendant, when it is not an independent legal entity that can sue or be sued. See Smith v. Lawton Corr. Facility, No. CIV-18-110-C, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 45488, at *5 (W.D. Okla. Mar. 7, 2018) (stating correctional facilities "not suable entities in a § 1983 action").

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:



(1) Plaintiff must within thirty days cure the Complaint's deficiencies noted above by filing a document entitled, “Amended Complaint,” that does not refer to or include any other document.



(2) The Clerk's Office shall mail Plaintiff the Pro Se Litigant Guide with a blank-form civil-rights complaint which Plaintiff must use if he wishes to pursue an amended complaint.



(3) If Plaintiff fails to timely cure the above deficiencies according to this Order's instructions, this action will be dismissed without further notice.



(4) The amended complaint shall not include any claims (a) occurring past the date of the Complaint, filed April 26, 2022, and (b) outside the allegations of transactions and events contained in the Complaint, (ECF No. 11). The Court will not address any such new claims or



7



outside allegations, which will be dismissed. If Plaintiff wishes to raise other claims and allegations, Plaintiff may do so only in a new complaint in a new case.



(5) Plaintiff shall not try to serve the amended complaint on Defendants; instead, the Court will perform its screening function and determine itself whether the amended complaint warrants service or dismissal (in part or in full). No motion for service of process is needed. See 28 U.S.C.S. § 1915(d) (2023) (“The officers of the court shall issue and serve all process, and perform all duties in [in forma pauperis] cases.”).



(6) Plaintiff must tell the Court of any address change and timely comply with Court orders. See D. Utah Civ. R. 83-1.3(e) ("In all cases, counsel and parties appearing pro se must notify the clerk's office immediately of any change in address, email address, or telephone number."). Failure to do so may result in this action's dismissal for failure to prosecute. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b) (“If the plaintiff fails to prosecute or to comply with these rules or a court order, a defendant may move to dismiss the action or any claim against it. Unless the dismissal order states otherwise, a dismissal under this subdivision (b) and any dismissal not under this rule--except one for lack of jurisdiction, improper venue, or failure to join a party under Rule 19--operates as an adjudication on the merits.”).



(7) Extensions of time are disfavored, though reasonable extensions may be granted. Any motion for time extension must be filed no later than fourteen days before the deadline to be extended.



(8) No direct communication is to take place with any judge. All relevant information, letters, documents, and papers, labeled with case number, are to be directed to the Clerk of Court.



8



(9) Plaintiffs motion for default judgment is DENIED, (ECF No. 19). There is no valid complaint on file, and Defendants were never served.

Maughan v. Salt Lake Cnty. Metro Jail (D. Utah 2023)