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 12-13-2005 

# Ask ew v . J ones 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 . 04-3900

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 authori 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 " Askew v . J one s " (2005). 2005 D e cisio n s . P ape r 121. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005/121NOT 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. 04- 3900 R I C C I A S K E W,

A ppel l ant v. N J O N E S, PL FD . D . O . #15611; K C O N N O R S, PL FD . P. O . #10409; P E SPO SI T O , PL FD . P. O . #11286 SHI FT COM M AN DER ON THE SCEN E SGT. O n A p p ea l from the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt

forthe D i s tr i ctof N ew J er s ey D . C . C i vi l A ct i on N o. 04- cv- 00029 (H o n o rab le W il li am G . B assler) Subm i tt ed Pur s uantt o T hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

N ovember7, 2005 B efor e: SC I R I C A , C hi ef J udge, FI SH E R and A L D I SE R T C i r cui tJ udges

( Fi l ed: D ece m ber13, 2005 ) OPI NI ON O F THE COURT P E R C U R I A M. R icc i A sk e w f

iled th is c iv il righ ts a c tio n p ro se , p u rsu a n t to 4 2 U .S .C . § 1 9 8 3 in the U ni t ed St at es D i s tr i ctC our tforthe D i s tr i ctof N ew J er s ey , al l egi ng thatA ppel l eesA s the part i es ar e fa m i l i arw i th the fa ct s , w e r eci t e them her e onl yas nece s s aryt o our 1 di s cus s i on. 2 vi ol at ed hi s cons t i tut i onal r i ght s w hen theyw er e del i ber at el yi ndi ffe r entt o hi s s er i ous m edi cal needs . A ppel l ees , w ho ar e Pl ai nfi el d, N ew J er s ey , pol i ce of fi cer s , arr es t ed 1 A sk e w a f

ter re sp o n d in g to th e sc e n e o f a f ig h t in w h ich h e w a s in v o lv e d . In h is compl ai nt , A s kew as s ert s thatA ppel l ees i gnor ed hi s r epea t ed r eques t s form edi cal att ent i on fori nj ur i es he s us t ai ned dur i ng the fi ghtand del ay ed the medi cal tr eatm entt hat he ul t i m at el yr ece i ved. H e al s o al l eges thatA ppel l ees verbal l yhar as s ed hi m thr oughout the a rrest pro ce ss. A sk ew see k s b o th reim b u rsem en t fo r his m ed ical co sts an d m o n etary dam ages. B efor e A ppel l ees had ans w er ed, the D i s tr i ctC our tdi s m i s s ed A s kew ’ s compl ai nt s ua s pont e forfai l ur e t o s t at e a c l ai m upon w hi ch r el i ef maybe gr ant ed, pur s uantt o 28 U . S. C . §§ 1915( e) ( 2) ( B ) ( i i ) and 1915A ( b) ( 1) . A s kew di d notappea l fr om thi s di s m i s s al or der . I ns t ead, he w r ot e t o t he D i s tr i ctC our ton J anuary21, 2004, expr es s i ng d is s a tis f a c tio n w ith th e o u tc o m e a n d re q u e s tin g in f o rm a tio n o n h o w to re -o p e n h is c a s e . Si x m onths l at er , havi ng r ece i ved no r es pons e, A s kew fi l ed a doc um entcapt i oned “M ot i on forR econs i der at i on D ue t o A s s i gnm entJ udge’ s Pl ai n E rr or , ” w hi ch the D i s tr i ct C o u rtco n stru ed as a m o ti o n fo r reco n side rati o n u n d er F ed era l R u le of C ivil P roc ed u reA p p e llee s h a v e n o tifie d th is C o u rt th a t th e yw ill n o t b e p a rticip a tin g in th e a p p e a l. 2 A s kew ’ s l ett erw as docket ed as fi l ed on J anuary30, 2004 butw as dat ed J anuary21, 3 2004. A s A s kew w as i ncar cer at ed w hen he mai l ed i t , w e cons i derthe mot i on t o be fi l ed w ith in R u le 5 9 (e )’ s te n -d a ytim e lim it. S e e H o u s to n v . L a c k , 4 8 7 U .S . 2 6 6 , 2 7 0 (1 9 8 8 ). 3 5 9 (e ) a n d d e n ied . A sk e w ’s a p p e a l f ro m th is d e n ial o rd e r is p re se n tlyb e f o re u s, a s is h is m o tio n f o r su m m a ryre v e rsa l. 2 T h e D i s tr i c tC o u r th a d j u r i s d i c t i o n p u r s u a n tt o 2 8 U . S . C . § § 1 3 3 1 a n d 1 3 4 3 . We h a v e a p p e llate ju risd ictio n u n d e r 2 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 9 1 . A lth o u g h A sk e w d id n o t f o rm a lly capt i on i tas s uch, w e l i ber al l ycons true hi s J anuary21 l ett eras a t i m el ym ot i on for st rec o n side rati o n u n d er R u le 59 (e). S ee H aine s v . K ern er, 40 4 U . S . 5 1 9 , 5 2 0 -21 (19 7 2 ); 3 D l uhos v. St r as ber g, 321 F. 3d 365, 369 ( 3d C i r . 2003) . A s the D i s tr i ctC our tdi d not di s pos e of i texpl i ci t l y , thi s m ot i on r emai ned pendi ng unt i l i tw as i m pl i ci t l ydeni ed byt he D i s tr i ctC our t ’ s deni al of R ul e 59( e) r el i ef on A ugus t30, 2004. A s kew ’ s t i m el yappea l fr om thatdeni al br i ngs up forr evi ew the D i s tr i ctC our t ’ s or derof di s m i s s al . See Feder al K em p er In s. C o . v . R au sch er, 80 7 F . 2 d 3 4 5 , 3 4 8 (3d C ir . 1 9 8 6 ). O urr evi ew of the D i s tr i ctC our t ’ s di s m i s s al forfai l ur e t o s t at e a c l ai m under28 U . S. C . § 1915( e) ( 2) ( B ) ( i i ) i s pl enary , and “w e mustacc eptas true the fa ctual al l egat i ons i n the compl ai ntand al l r eas onabl e i nfer ence s thatcan be dr aw n ther efr om . ” See A l l ah v. Sei ver l i ng, 229 F. 3d 220, 223 ( 3d C i r . 2000) ( quot i ng N ami v. Fauver , 82 F. 3d 63, 65 ( 3d C i r . 1996) ) . T o s t at e an Ei ghth A m endmentcl ai m bas ed on A ppel l ees ’ i nt ent i onal del ay in p ro v id in g h im m e d ica l trea tm e n t, A sk e w m u st a lleg e th a t A p p e llee s w e re d e lib e ra tely4

i ndi ffe r entt o hi s s er i ous m edi cal needs . See Est el l e v. G ambl e, 429 U . S. 97, 104- 105 ( 1976) ; D ur m erv. O ’ C arr ol l , 991 F. 2d 64, 67 ( 3d C i r . 1988) . D eni al ordel ayof r eas onabl e r eques t s form edi cal tr eatm entcan c ons t i tut e del i ber at e i ndi ffe r ence . See M o n m o u th C o u n tyC o rr. Institu ti o n al Inm ates v . L an za ro, 83 4 F . 2 d 3 2 6 , 3 4 6 -47 (3d C ir . 1 9 8 7 ). A sk ew ca n d em o n str ate “ d eli b era te i n d iffe ren ce ” b ysh o w ing that A p p ell ee s w ere “aw ar e of f

act s fr om w hi ch the i nfer ence can be dr aw n thata s ubs t ant i al r i s k of s er i ous ha r m exi s t s a nd [tha tthe y ] a l s o [ dr e w ] the i nf e r e nc e . ” Se e Fa r merv. Br e nn a n, 51 1 U. S. 8 2 5 , 8 3 7 (19 9 4 ). H o w ev er, A sk ew ca n n o t r elyso lel yo n resp o n d ea t sup erior as a the o ry of l i abi l i ty ; r ather , he musts how per s onal i nvol vementbyA ppel l ees byal l egi ng per s onal di r ect i on, actual know l edge, oracqui es cenc e. See R ode v. D el l ar ci pr et e, 845 F. 2d 1195, 1 2 0 7 (3 d C ir . 1 9 8 8 ). T h e c o m p lain t as se rts th a t A sk e w to ld A p p e llee s E sp o sito a n d C o n n o rs th a t h e f e lt di zzyfr om havi ng been a s s aul t ed w i th a br i ck and ne eded medi cal att ent i on. A s kew cont ends thatE s pos i t o and C onnor s di d notm er el yi gnor e hi s r eques t s form edi cal att ent i on, butexpl i ci t l yr efus ed them, t el l i ng hi m thathe di d notneed t o s ee a doct orand cur s i ng athi m . A s kew cl ai m s thathe w as l efti n the bac k s eatof the s quad ca r , bl eedi ng h e a v ilya n d f

a d in g in a n d o u t o f

c o n sc io u sn e ss , an d th a t A p p e llee s w o u ld n o t allo w h im to re c e iv e m e d ic a l tr e a tm e n t f ro m a n e m e rg e n c ym e d ic a l v e h ic le a t th e s c e n e o f h is a rr e s t. T he compl ai ntfur theral l eges thatw hi l e en r out e t o pol i ce he adquart er s , A ppel l ees di d a “U - turn” t o r eturn t o t he s cene , cont i nui ng t o i gnor e hi s r eques t s form edi cal att ent i on andC on traryt o A skew ’s i m pli cat i on , his com plai nt w as di sm i ssed not as “fr i vo l ou s” 4 under28 U . S. C . § 1915( e) ( 2) ( b) ( i ) butforfai l ur e t o s t at e a c l ai m under § 1 9 1 5 (e )(2 )(b )(ii). W h ile th is d istin c tio n d o e s n o t alte r th e f a c t o f d ism iss a l, i t su p p o rts A skew ’s argum ent r egardi ng al l ow ance o f am end m ent. U nli ke fri vo l ou s com plai nts , am end m ent of w hich w ou l d p erforce be futi l e, i n fo rm a pau peri s pl ai nti ffs w ho se c o m p lain ts a re d ism iss e d f o r f a ilu re to sta te a c laim u n d e r § 1 9 1 5 (e )(2 )(b )(ii) sh o u ld gener al l ybe gr ant ed l eave t o amend. See G r ay s on v. M ayvi ew St at e H os pi t al , 293 F. 3d 1 0 3 , 1 1 4 (3d C ir . 2 0 0 2 ). 5 fur therdel ay i ng the tr eatm enthe eve ntual l yr ece i ved. H e cl ai m s thathe w as t aken t o t he hos pi t al onl yaft erhe had l os tcons ci ous nes s i n the pol i ce booki ng ar ea. O nce a tthe h o s p ita l, h e re c e iv e d n in e s ta p le s to h is h e a d , X -r a y s , a n d o th e r t re a tm e n t to ta lin g $ 3 ,0 0 0 . A sk e w a ss e rts th a t A p p e llee C o n n o rs k n e w a b o u t th e h e a d in ju ryb e c a u se h e re f

e rre d to it i n hi s i nci dentr eportand thatthe r emai ni ng A ppel l ees knew of hi s i nj urybeca us e bl ood w a s v is ib ly “l e a k in g ” f

ro m th e b a c k o f

h is h e a d . O n a p p e a l, A sk e w a rg u e s th a t th e D istric t C o u rt p e n a lize d h im f o r a d h e rin g to Feder al R ul e of Ci vi l Pr ocedur e 8( a) ( 2) ’ s r equi r ementof pr ovi di ng onl ya “s hor tand p lain sta tem e n t” o f

h is c laim . A sk e w c o n ten d s th a t th e D istric t C o u rt c o n f u se d h is b re v itya t th e c o m p lain t sta g e w ith “ f riv o lo u sn e ss ” a n d th a t h is p ro se c o m p lain t sh o u ld have be en l i ber al l ycons trued. A l t ernat i vel y , A s kew as s ert s thathe s houl d have be en gi ven an opportuni tyt o amend t he compl ai ntt o expand i t s al l egat i ons , i n l i ghtof the fa ct thatA ppel l ees had noty etans w er ed. A ft err evi ew , w e bel i eve thatA s kew ’ s compl ai nt 4 w as pr ematur el ydi s m i s s ed. See Fed. R . C i v. P. 8( a) ( 2) . W e ac know l edge the D i s tr i ct C our t ’ s dutyt o s cr een pr i s oner s ’ i n form a paupe r i s compl ai nt s pur s uantt o the Pr i s onA l though noti ncar cer at ed w hen the al l eged i nci dent s occurr ed or , appar ent l y , at 5 pr es ent , A s kew w as i ncar cer at ed w hen he f i l ed the compl ai nt . T her efor e, the D i s tr i ct C our tpr oper l ys cr eene d t he compl ai ntpur s uantt o § 1915A . See A bdul - A kbarv. M cK elvie, 23 9 F . 3 d 3 0 7 , 3 1 4 (3d C ir . 2 0 0 1 ). A s not ed bythe D i s tr i ctC our t , atthe t i m e the under l y i ng event s occurr ed, A s kew w as 6 p r o p e r l yc o n s i d e r e d a p r e tr i a l d e t a i n e e r a th e rth a n a p r i s o n e r . Ho we v e r , me d i c a l c l a i ms o f th e typ e a t is s u e h e re a re g o v e rn e d b yth e s a m e “ d e lib e ra te in d if f e re n c e ” s ta n d a rd . S e e , e .g ., H u b b a rd v . T a y lo r, 3 9 9 F .3 d 1 5 0 , 1 6 6 n .2 2 (3 d C ir . 2 0 0 5 ). 6 L i t i gat i on R eform A ct . N onethel es s , A s kew ’ s compl ai ntconform s t o the not i ce- 5 pl eadi ng s t andar d forpr o s e ci vi l r i ght s compl ai nt s . See A l s t on v. Par ker , 363 F. 3d 229, 234 ( 3d C i r . 2004) ( i nt ernal ci t at i on om i t t ed) ; L eatherm an v. T arr antC ountyN ar cot i cs In tellig e n c e a n d C o o rd in a tio n U n it, 5 0 7 U .S . 1 6 3 , 1 6 8 (1 9 9 3 ). A lth o u g h w e a g re e w ith the D i s tr i ctC our tthatA s kew ’ s verbal har as s m entcl ai m i s notact i onabl e under§ 1983, s ee, e. g. , O l t ar zew s ki v. R uggi er o, 830 F. 2d 136, 139 ( 9 C i r . 1987) , A s kew ’ s compl ai nt th s t at es a cogni zabl e Ei ghth A m endmentcl ai m of del i ber at e i ndi ffe r ence t o a s er i ous m e d ica l n e e d . S e e M o n m o u th C o u n tya t 3 4 6 -4 7 ; E ste lle a t 1 0 4 . A c c o rd in g ly , w e v a c a te 6 the j udgm entof the D i s tr i ctC our tand r emand w i th i ns truct i ons thatA s kew ’ s compl ai nt b e re instated an d A p p ell ee s b e o rde red to an sw er. A p p ell an t’ s m o ti o n fo r sum m ary re v e rsa l is d e n ied a s m o o t.