Opinion
3:24-CV-467-CCB-MGG
06-10-2024
SCOTT THOMAS BARRY, Plaintiff, v. STATE OF INDIANA, CHRISTINA REAGLE, BRIAN ENGLISH, and RODGERS, Defendants.
OPINION AND ORDER
CRISTAL C. BRISCO, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
Scott Thomas Barry, a prisoner without a lawyer, filed a complaint raising the same claims against the same defendants that he presented in a prior complaint. ECF 1. “A document filed pro se is to be liberally construed, and 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). Nevertheless, under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, the court must review the merits of a prisoner complaint and dismiss it if the action is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief.
In the complaint filed in this case, Barry sues four defendants. He is also suing the same four defendants in Barry v. State of Indiana, 3:24-cv-439 (N.D. Ind. filed May 28, 2024). In both cases he alleges he was approved for the SNAP program at the Indiana Department of Correction, but has not been allowed to participate in it. In both cases he alleges he is mentally ill and has swallowed razor blades. It is malicious to sue the same defendants for the same events in two cases. Barry may sue these defendants in the prior case, but this case will be dismissed.
For these reasons, this case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A because it is malicious to sue the same defendants for the same events in more than one lawsuit.
SO ORDERED.