Historically, in such circumstances, this Court has refused to consider a claim not fairly raised in the complaint. See generally East v. Dooley, No. 4:19-cv-04126-RAL, 2020 WL 5816248, at *27 (D.S.D. Sept. 30, 2020), affd, 847 Fed.Appx. 359 (8th Cir. 2021).

Brawner v. Allstate Indem. Co., 591 F.3d 984, 987 (8th Cir. 2010) (quoting Resolution Trust Corp. v. Eason, 17 F.3d 1126, 1132 (8th Cir. 1994)). Liquid Cap. Exch., Inc. v. BDC Grp., Inc., No. 20-CV-89 CJW-MAR, 2021 WL 6144654, at *3 (N.D. Iowa Nov. 19, 2021) (quoting Eckelkamp v. Beste, 315 F.3d 863, 872 (8th Cir. 2002)); see also East v. Dooley, No. 4:19-CV-04126-RAL, 2020 WL 5816248, at *1-2 (D.S.D. Sept. 30, 2020), aff'd, 847 Fed.Appx. 359 (8th Cir. 2021); Maday v. Dooley, No. 4:17-CV-04168-KES, 2019 WL 4935705, at *48-51 (D.S.D. Mar. 8, 2019), report and recommendation adopted as modified, 2019 WL 4747058 (Sept. 30, 2019), opinion corrected on denial of reconsideration sub nom. Maday v. Pierre, 2020 WL 4904055 (Aug. 20, 2020); Brown v. Richards, No. 17-6080-CV-SJ-HFS-P, 2018 WL 10400001, at *1-2 (W.D. Mo. Dec. 10, 2018). Cf. Liquid Cap. Exch., 2021 WL 6144654, at *3-5

Scott's claim concerning the assaults fails because he did not name any correctional officers as defendants and thereby failed to plead the claim in his complaint. Doc. 1; Doc. 58 at 19. See Wendt, 971 F.3d at 821 (holding a "district court properly refused to consider" a claim that was not pled in the complaint); East v. Dooley, No. 4:19-CV-04126-RAL, 2020 WL 5816248, at *27 (D.S.D. Sept. 30, 2020) (refusing to consider a "claim for sexual abuse because [the plaintiff] did not plead it in his complaint"), affd, 847 Fed.Appx. 359 (8th Cir. 2021) (per curiam). Even if Scott had properly pleaded this claim, the record does not support Scott's allegations that correctional officers failed to protect him from unprovoked attacks.

In addition, Plaintiff testified during his deposition that he did not ask Defendant Cross to use the step stool. See East v. Dooley, No. 4:19-CV-04126, 2020 WL 5816248, at *22 (D. South Dakota Sept. 30, 2020) (finding no reasonable jury could find officer's failure to pull out the step stool or otherwise assist an inmate in exiting the van even though inmate was handcuffed, belly chained, and there was ice/snow on the ground where officer retrieved the step stool after the inmate “almost fell on the ice and snow and felt pain in his right foot immediately”.) Defendant Cross's failure to use the step stool to assist Plaintiff in entering the van may have been careless, but at most he was negligent.