Source: http://ky.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.20180329_0000254.WKY.htm/qx
Timestamp: 2019-04-23 00:33:15+00:00

Document:
Plaintiff Justin Walters, a prisoner presently incarcerated at Kentucky State Penitentiary (KSP), filed a pro se complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (DNs 1 & 1-3). This matter is before the Court for initial review of the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A and McGore v. Wrigglesworth, 114 F.3d 601, 608 (6th Cir. 1997), overruled on other grounds by Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. 199 (2007). For the reasons that follow, the Court will dismiss the official-capacity claims for monetary damages and allow the following claims to proceed: (1) the Eighth Amendment excessive-force claims against Defendants Coombs and Tomlin in their individual capacities and in their official capacities for injunctive and declaratory relief; (2) the First Amendment retaliation claims against Defendants Coombs and Tomlin in their individual capacities and in their official capacities for injunctive and declaratory relief; and (3) the Eighth Amendment claims against Defendants Inglish, Burnett, Knight, and Mankle in their individual capacities and in their official capacities for injunctive and declaratory relief.
Then, according to Plaintiff, Defendant Coombs instructed Defendant Burnett to “help him plant [Plaintiff's] face in the wall.” Plaintiff states that Defendant Coombs ordered Defendant Inglish to remove all of Plaintiff's property from his cell and that he would “see how many grievances [Plaintiff] filed[d] with nothing In [his] cell.” Plaintiff states that while all this was happening, Lt. Peede came onto the walk and inquired about what was happening. According to Plaintiff, when Lt. Peede observed the substance in the toilet paper, he did not think that it looked like crushed medication. Plaintiff states that Defendant Coombs commented to Lt. Peede saying, “You know how I like to plant things sometimes.” Lt. Peede encouraged Plaintiff to remain calm and assured Plaintiff that he would get all his stuff back if the substance was not medication.
Plaintiff states that he is asserting Eighth Amendment claims against Defendants Coombs and Tomlin for excessive force, First Amendment claims against Defendant Coombs and Tomlin for retaliation, and Eighth Amendment claims against Defendants Inglish, Burnett, Knight, and Mankle for “failing to correct” and “encouraging the continuation of the misconduct” of Defendants Coombs and Tomlin.
Because Plaintiff is a prisoner seeking relief against governmental entities, officers, and/or employees, this Court must review the instant action under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Under § 1915A, the trial court must review the complaint and dismiss the complaint, or any portion of the complaint, if the court determines that it is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. See § 1915A(b)(1), (2); McGore v. Wrigglesworth, 114 F.3d at 608.

References: § 1983
 § 1915
 v. 
 v. 
 § 1915
 § 1915
 § 1915
 v.