2005 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 7-6-2005 

# F lowe rs v . Leb anon C ty P ri son P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 03-3039

F o llow thi s and a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e and ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2005 D e c i sion s b y an author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi ll anova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion " Flowe r s v . L eb anon C ty P r i s on" (2005). 2005 D e cisio n s . P ape r 898. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005/898AP S - 1 5 7 NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT N O . 03- 3039

________________ F R A N K F L O W E R S , J R ., A ppel l ant

V. L E BA NON C OUNT Y P RI S ON; CH AD E B E R S O L E ; JO H N R U S S E L L ; CH AR LES D. J ON ES

____________________________________ O n A p p ea l Fro m the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt F o r th e M id d le D istric t o f P e n n sy lv a n ia ( D . C . C i v. N o. 02- cv- 00136) D i s t r i ctJ udge: H onor abl e J ames M . M unl ey

_______________________________________ Subm i t t ed ForPoss i bl e D i s m i s s al U nder28 U . S. C . § 1915( e) ( 2) ( B ) and P o s s ib le S u m m a ry A c tio n U n d e r T h ir d C ir c u it L A R 2 7 .4 a n d I.O .P . 1 0 .6 B efore: S L O V ITE R , R O T H , A N D A M B R O C i rcui tJudg es.

( Fi l ed J ul y6, 2005)

_______________________ OP I NI ON

_______________________ P E R C UR I AM Fr ank Fl ow er s , J r . appea l s fr om t he di s m i s s al of hi s compl ai ntbyt he D i s t r i ct2

C our tfort he M i ddl e D i s t r i ctof Penns y l vani a. In 2 0 0 2 , w h ile a n in m a te a t L e b a n o n C o u n tyP riso n (“ L C P ” ), F lo w e rs f iled a c iv il rig h ts c o m p lain t ra isin g v a rio u s a lleg a tio n s re g a rd in g h is tre a tm e n t b yth e L C P o f f icia ls an d h is pu b li c d ef

en d er. L C P an d the p u b li c d ef en d er f il ed a m o ti o n to d ism iss fo r fa il u re t o s t at e a c l ai m . T he D i s t r i ctC our tgr ant ed the mot i on and deni ed Fl ow er s ’ m ot i on for re c o n sid e ra tio n . F lo w e rs f iled a tim e lyn o tice o f

a p p e a l. T h e C o u rt issu e d a n o rd e r to s how caus e w hyt he mat t ers houl d notbe s um m ar i l yr emanded t o t he D i s t r i ctC our tfor th e D istric t C o u rt to g ra n t F lo w e rs le a v e to a m e n d h is c o m p lain t. A s i ts t ands , Fl ow er s ’ compl ai ntcl ear l yfai l s t o s t at e a c l ai m upon w hi ch r el i ef c an be gr ant ed, es s ent i al l yfort he r eas ons s t at ed byt he D i s t r i ctC our t . See C ur t i s v. E ver et t e, 4 8 9 F . 2 d 5 1 6 , 5 2 1 (3d C ir . 1 9 7 3 ); P att o n v . P rzyb y lski, 8 2 2 F . 2 d 6 9 7 , 7 0 0 (7 C ir . 1 9 8 7 ); th E dw ar ds v. B al i s ok, 520 U . S. 641, 643 ( 1997) . H ow ever , t he D i s t r i ctC our tdi d notgi ve Fl ow er s an oppor tuni t yt o amend hi s compl ai nt , orot herw i s e det erm i ne thatany amendm entw oul d be i nequi t abl e orfut i l e. See A l s t on v. Par ker , 363 F. 3d 229, 235 ( 3d C i r . 2004) ; G r ay s on v. M ayvi ew St at e H os p. , 293 F. 3d 103, 108 ( 3d C i r . 2002) . W i t hout expr es s i ng anyopi ni on as t o t he ul t i m at e mer i t s of anypos s i bl e amendm ent , w e do not fi nd t hat an am end m ent w ou l d b e i neq uit able orfuti l e. A ccordi ng l y , w e w i l l no tdis m i ss t hi s appea l as fr i vol ous under28 U . S. C . § 1915( e) , and w e w i l l s um m ar i l yr emand t he m a tter to th e D istric t C o u rt w ith in stru c tio n s to g ra n t F lo w e rs le a v e to a m e n d h is c o m p lain t.