Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Goldman v. Elum

United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division

July 22, 2019

LANCE ADAM GOLDMAN, No. 542675, Plaintiff,
v.
HATATU ELUM, et. al., Defendants.

          Hon. Stephanie Dawkins Davis

         OPINION AND ORDER OF PARTIAL DISMISSAL, GRANTING MOTION TO REOPEN CASE [ECF NO. 16], GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTIONS TO SUPPLEMENT COMPLAINT [ECF NOS. 14, 15, 18], DENYING MOTION TO EXTEND TIME [ECF NO. 17] AS MOOT, AND DENYING EMERGENCY MOTION [ECF NO. 19]

          HON. GERSHWIN A. DRAIN UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE.

         Plaintiff Lance Adam Goldman is a state prisoner currently incarcerated at the Saginaw Correctional Facility in Freeland, Michigan. Mr. Goldman filed a pro se civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 which this Court dismissed without prejudice on April 5, 2019, applying the “three strikes” provision of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). (ECF No. 11.) Mr. Goldman now seeks to reopen the case (ECF No. 16) and to supplement his complaint (ECF Nos. 14, 15, 18, and 19). Upon review of Plaintiff's motions, supplemental complaints, and exhibits, the Court will reopen this case and deny in part and grant in part Mr. Goldman's motions to supplement. The Court also orders Plaintiff to file an amended complaint as explained further below.

         I. SUMMARY OF CLAIMS

         To the best of the Court's understanding, Plaintiff has asserted the following claims in his various pleadings:

         Original Complaint (ECF No. 1)

         1. Sexual assault claims again Defendants Londo and Grace.

         2. Retaliatory transfers by G. Robert Cotton Correctional Facility (JCF) defendants.

         3. Conspiracy by MDOC Director Heidi Washington and other MDOC defendants to house Plaintiff with dangerous inmates, for the purposes of having him assaulted.

         4. MDOC failure to provide mental or medical health treatment as necessary following the sexual assaults.

         Supplemental Complaint and Motion for Leave to Supplement (ECF Nos. 14 and 15)

         5. Conspiracy by the MDOC and Defendant Michigan State Police Gauthier to cover up the sexual assaults. (Supp. Compl. at 9, ECF No. 14, PageID 242; M. for Lv. to Supp. at 2, ECF No. 15, PageID 296.)

         6. Interference by Defendants Daniel Manville and Michigan State University with Plaintiff's ability to investigate his case. (Supp. Compl. at 13, PageID 246.)

         7. Inadequate clean air and ventilation. (M. for Lv. to Supp. at 3-5, PageID 297-299.)

         8. MDOC failure to treat Plaintiff's symptoms of HPV, establishing imminent danger. (Id. at 6, PageID 300.)

         Plaintiff's “Emergency Motion” to supplement (ECF No. 19)

         9. Plaintiff's assault by a cellmate while in Cotton Correctional Facility (JCF). (Em'y M. at 3, ECF. No. 19, PageID 381.)

         10. A JCF corrections officer encouraging assaults by fellow prisoners. (Id. at 5, PageID 383.)

         Plaintiff's motions to reopen case (ECF No. 16) and to supplement complaint (ECF No. 18) contained no new claims or parties.

         II. LEGAL STANDARDS

         A. In Forma Pauperis

         Under the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1996 (“PLRA”), Pub. L. No. 104 134, 110 Stat. 1321(1996), a prisoner may not commence an action without prepayment of the filing fee in some form. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). Section 1915 provides indigent prisoners the opportunity to make a “downpayment” of a partial filing fee and pay the remainder in installments. Miller v. Campbell, 108 F.Supp.2d 960, 962 (W.D. Tenn. 2000); see also 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b).

         The PLRA also contains a “three-strikes” provision which “prohibits prisoners who have brought multiple frivolous appeals from receiving pauper status.” Coleman v. Tollefson, 733 F.3d 175, 176 (6th Cir. 2013), as amended on denial of reh'g and reh'g en banc (Jan. 17, 2014), aff'd, 135 S.Ct. 1759 (2015). A court must dismiss a case where the prisoner seeks to proceed in forma pauperis if on three or more previous occasions a federal court has dismissed the ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.