UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

SOUTH BEND DIVISION

QUINTIN JAMAR )

MAYWEATHER-BROWN, )

)

Plaintiff, )

) 

v. ) No. 3:14 CV 2089

)

CORRECTIONAL CARE SOLUTIONS, )

et al., )

)

Defendants. )

OPINION AND ORDER

Quintin Jamar Mayweather-Brown, a pro se prisoner, filed an amended complaint

under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (DE # 30.) The court must review the complaint and dismiss it if

the action is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim for relief, or seeks monetary

relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. To

survive dismissal, the complaint must state a claim for relief that is plausible on its face.

Bissessur v. Indiana Univ. Bd. of Trs., 581 F.3d 599, 602-03 (7th Cir. 2009). “A claim has

facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw

the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.” Id. at

603. Thus, the plaintiff “must do better than putting a few words on paper that, in the

hands of an imaginative reader, might suggest that something has happened to her that

might be redressed by the law.” Swanson v. Citibank, N.A., 614 F.3d 400, 403 (7th Cir.

2010). Nevertheless, the court must bear in mind that “a pro se complaint, however

inartfully pleaded, must be held to less stringent standards than formal pleadings
drafted by lawyers.” Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007) (quotation marks and

citations omitted). “In order to state a claim under § 1983 a plaintiff must allege: (1) that

defendants deprived him of a federal constitutional right; and (2) that the defendants

acted under color of state law.” Savory v. Lyons, 469 F.3d 667, 670 (7th Cir. 2006). 

Mayweather-Brown is currently incarcerated at the Reception and Diagnostic

Center (“RDC”). He brings a number of claims against nine different defendants arising

out of his incarceration at the Elkhart County Jail, where he was confined as a pretrial

detainee. Mayweather-Brown alleges that while incarcerated at the Elkhart County Jail,

he was subjected to cruel and unusual punishment. Because Mayweather-Brown was a

pretrial detainee at the time of these events, the Fourteenth rather than the Eighth

Amendment applies. Lewis v. Downey, 581 F.3d 467, 473 (7th Cir. 2009). The governing

standards are functionally equivalent, and “anything that would violate the Eighth

Amendment would also violate the Fourteenth Amendment.” Id. “In evaluating the

constitutionality of conditions or restrictions of pretrial detention . . . the proper inquiry

is whether those conditions amount to punishment of the detainee.” Bell v. Wolfish, 441

U.S. 520, 535 (1979).

In order to violate the Eighth Amendment, deprivations must be “unquestioned

and serious” and deprive prisoner of “the minimal civilized measure of life’s

necessities.” Rhodes v. Chapman, 452 U.S. 337, 349 (1981). Inmates are entitled to

adequate food, clothing, shelter, medical care, bedding, hygiene materials, and

sanitation. Knight v. Wiseman, 590 F.3d 458, 463 (7th Cir. 2009); Gillis v. Litscher, 468 F.3d

-2-
488, 493 (7th Cir. 2006). Conditions of confinement may establish a constitutional

violation in combination when each condition alone would not satisfy the standard.

Gillis, 468 F.3d at 493. “[I]n the absence of an expressed intent to punish, a pretrial

detainee can nevertheless prevail by showing that the actions are not ‘rationally related

to a legitimate nonpunitive governmental purpose’ or that the actions ‘appear excessive

in relation to that purpose.’” Kingsley v. Hendrickson, 576 U.S. --,--, 135 S.Ct. 2466, 2473

(2015) (quoting Bell, 441 U.S. at 535.). 

To start, Mayweather-Brown complains that Captain Jhon Perry and Gary Yoder

denied him a mattress for eighteen hours a day, requiring him to sleep on the concrete

floor. He also claims he was deprived of clothes and blankets and the cell had

inadequate heat. This resulted in Mayweather-Brown having consistent migraines, neck

pains and suffering from sleep deprivation. Giving Mayweather-Brown the inferences

to which he is entitled, his allegations that he was denied adequate clothing, bedding or

adequate heat, satisfy the objective prong of the Eighth Amendment inquiry. See

Townsend v. Fuchs, 522 F.3d 765, 773-74 (7th Cir. 2008) (lack of proper bedding

constituted denial of civilized measure of life’s necessities); Murphy v. Walker, 51 F.3d

714, 720-21 (7th Cir. 1995) (pretrial detainee’s allegation that he was housed for

approximately 10 days without adequate heat, clothing, and bedding stated a

Fourteenth Amendment claim). In addition, Mayweather-Brown alleges that there was

no legitimate purpose for housing him under such conditions. Although further factual

development may show that Mayweather-Brown was housed under these conditions to

-3-
prevent him from hurting himself or for some other legitimate reason, giving him the

inferences to which he is entitled at this stage, he has stated enough to proceed with this

claim.

Next, Mayweather-Brown alleges Captain Perry, Dr. Matthews, Gary Yoder,

Nurse Robbin, Nurse Jessica, and Nurse Emily Ellory inflicted cruel and unusual

punishment by allowing him to harm himself. Due to diagnosed mental disorders,

Mayweather-Brown committed self-inflicted injuries and twice attempted suicide while

confined at the Elkhart County Jail. However, each of the officers and medical providers

refused to intervene. While further factual development may show that these

defendants were reasonable or justified in their actions, Mayweather-Brown has stated

a claim. Indeed, this court can imagine a scenario where these defendants had the

authority, and would be constitutionally obligated, to stop Mayweather-Brown from

harming himself. Freeman v. Berge, 441 F.3d 543 (7th Cir. 2006). It is plausible that taking

no corrective action could be unreasonable. Duane v. Lane, 959 F.2d 673 (7th Cir. 1992).

Next, he brings suit against Sheriff Brad Rogers due to various incidents of

officer and medical provider misconduct at the Elkhart County Jail. However, because

there is no general respondeat superior liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Sheriff Rogers

cannot be held liable simply because he oversees operations at the jail or supervises

other correctional officers. Burks,555 F.3d at 594. Accordingly, Sheriff Rogers will be

dismissed as a defendant.

-4-
Finally, Mayweather-Brown brings suit against Correctional Care Solutions and

RN Ashlyn. However, he does not allege any wrongdoing on Correctional Care’s

behalf. It appears his suit against this entity is based solely upon it being the employer

of various doctors and nurses. Like a municipal entity, a corporate entity acting under

color of state law cannot be held liable based only on a theory of respondeat superior.

Monell v. N.Y. City Dep’t of Soc. Servs., 436 U.S. 658 (1978); Woodward v. Corr. Med. Servs.

of Ill., Inc., 368 F.3d 917, 927 (7th Cir. 2004). Thus, Correctional Care Solutions cannot be

held liable solely because it is an employer. And, as Mayweather-Brown makes no

allegations against RN Ashlyn in the body of the amended complaint, she must be

dismissed at this juncture, too.

For these reasons, the court:

(1) GRANTS Quintin Jamar Mayweather-Brown leave to proceed against

Captain Jhon Perry and Gary Yoder in their individual capacities for monetary damages

for failing to provide him with adequate clothing, bedding, and heat while at the

Elkhart County Jail in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment;

(2) GRANTS Quintin Jamar Mayweather-Brown leave to proceed against

Captain Jhon Perry, Dr. Matthews, Gary Yoder, Nurse Robbin, Nurse Jessica, and Nurse

Emily Ellory in their individual capacities for monetary damages for cruel and unusual

punishment by allowing Mayweather-Brown to inflict harm upon himself while at the

Elkhart County Jail in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment;

(3) DISMISSES all other claims;

-5-
(4) DISMISSES Sheriff Brad Rogers, Correct Care Solutions and RN Ashlyn;

(5) DIRECTS the United States Marshals Service to effect service of process on

Captain Jhon Perry, Dr. Matthews, Gary Yoder, Nurse Robbin, Nurse Jessica, and Nurse

Emily Ellory pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d); and

(6) ORDERS Captain Jhon Perry, Dr. Matthews, Gary Yoder, Nurse Robbin,

Nurse Jessica, and Nurse Emily Ellory to respond, as provided for in the Federal Rules

of Civil Procedure, only to the claim for which the plaintiff has been granted leave to

proceed in this screening order. 

SO ORDERED.

Date: March 30, 2016

s/James T. Moody 

JUDGE JAMES T. MOODY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT