Order Form (01/2005)

United States District Court, Northern District of Mlinois we

N itt ju

nme sf swine Joes | CHARLES R. NORGLE, SR. | Sitmeavenvouer |],

CASE NUMBER 12 C 0674 DATE 47 o/, a
CASE William Tuck, Jr. (#N-50921) vs. Cook County Jail °
TITLE

The plaintiff's motion for leave to file in forma pauperis [#3] is granted. However, the complaint is summarily
dismissed on initial review pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A for failure to state a federal claim. The case is
terminated. The plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel [#4] is denied as moot. The trust fund officer at
the plaintiff’ s place of confinement is authorized and ordered to make deductions from the plaintiffs account and
payments to the clerk of court in accordance with this order. The clerk is directed to mail a copy of this order to
the trust fund officer at the Cave-in-Rock Correctional Center. This dismissal counts,as one of the plaintiff's

three allotted dismissals under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Vpfwte ff V7
CoG

@ [For further details see text below.] Docketing to mail notices.

STATEMENT
The plaintiff, currently a state prisoner, has brought this pro se civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983. The plaintiff seeks damages for injuries he sustained while working in the kitchen at the Cook County
Jail.

The court finds that the plaintiff is unable to prepay the filing fee. Accordingly, the court grants the

plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis and assesses an initial partial filing fee of $39.37 pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). The trust fund officer at the plaintiff's place of incarceration is authorized and ordered to

| collect, when funds exist, the partial filing fee from the plaintiff's trust fund account and pay it directly to the
clerk of court. Thereafter, the trust fund officer at the plaintiffs place of confinement is directed to collect
monthly payments from the plaintiff's trust fund account in the amount of 20% of the preceding month’s income
credited to the account. Monthly payments shall be forwarded to the clerk of court each time the account balance
exceeds $10 until the full $350 filing fee is paid. Separate deductions and payments shall be made with respect
to each action or appeal filed by the plaintiff. All payments shall be sent to the Clerk, United States District
Court, 219 S. Dearborn St., Chicago, Illinois 60604, attn: Cashier’s Desk, 20th Floor, and shall clearly identify
the plaintiff's name and this case number.
(CONTINUED)

mim

Page 1 of 2



However, under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), the court is required to dismiss a suit brought in forma pauperis

at any time if the court determines that it is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim on which relief may be
granted, or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief. Here, even accepting the
plaintiff's factual allegations as true, the court finds that the complaint fails to state a federal claim as a matter of
law.

The plaintiff alleges that while he was washing dishes at the Cook County Jail on August 23, 2011, a co-
worker pushing a cart of dinner trays accidentally spilled the contents. The heavy trays fell on the plaintiff,
knocking him to the floor and pinning him against the dishwasher. The plaintiff was taken to the hospital that night
for treatment of his injuries; however, he still experiences lingering pain in his knees.

While it is most regrettable that the plaintiff was injured, the court discerns no basis for suit in federal court.
In order to be liable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a defendant must have both (a) acted under color of state law and (b)
violated a constitutional right. Burrell v. City of Mattoon, 378 F.3d 642, 647 (7th Cir. 2004). An inmate worker
is nota state official or state employee; furthermore, a run-of-the-mill accident does not implicate any constitutional

| right. The court can conceive of no alternative basis for federal jurisdiction, such as diversity of citizenship or the
| existence of another federal statute.

Failure to take reasonable measures in the face of a substantial risk of serious harm would, of course, violate

| the Constitution. Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 845 (1994); Arnett v. Webster, 658 F.3d 742, 754 (7th Cir.
2011). Prison officials violate an inmate’s constitutional rights in conditions-of-confinement cases where the
alleged deprivation is “sufficiently serious” (the objective standard) and (2) the officials act with deliberate
indifference (the subjective standard). Farmer, 511 U.S. at 834; Lehn v. Holmes, 364 F.3d 862, 872 (7th Cir. 2004).
But in the case at bar, the plaintiff has not described any unreasonable risk he faced working in the kitchen;
furthermore, the only named defendant, the Cook County Department of Corrections, is not a suable entity. See,
e.g., Castillo v. Cook County Department Mail Room, 990 F.2d 304 (7th Cir. 1993). If the plaintiff wishes to sue
for negligence, he must file suit in the state court system or the Illinois Court of Claims.

For the foregoing reasons, this suit is dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted
in federal court. The plaintiffis warned that if a prisoner has had a total of three federal cases or appeals dismissed
as frivolous, malicious, or failing to state a claim, he may not file suit in federal court without prepaying the filing
fee unless he is in imminent danger of serious physical injury. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).

If the plaintiff wishes to appeal this dismissal, he may file a notice of appeal with this court within thirty
days of the entry of judgment. Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(4). A motion for leave to appeal in forma pauperis should set
forth the issues the plaintiff plans to present on appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(1)(C). If the plaintiff does choose
to appeal, he will be liable for the $455 appellate filing fee irrespective of the outcome of the appeal. Evans v.
Illinois Dept. of Corrections, 150 F.3d 810, 812 (7th Cir. 1998). Furthermore, if the appeal is found to be non-

|| meritorious, the plaintiff may also accumulate another “strike.”

Page 2 of 2