From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jiggetts v. Airmart

United States District Court, Northern District of Indiana
Aug 3, 2023
3:23-CV-728-JD-JPK (N.D. Ind. Aug. 3, 2023)

Opinion

3:23-CV-728-JD-JPK

08-03-2023

DEVANTE JIGGETTS, Plaintiff, v. AIRMART, Defendant.


OPINION AND ORDER

JON E. DEGUILIO, JUDGE

Devante Jiggetts, a prisoner without a lawyer, filed a complaint alleging he chipped a tooth on a rock he found in his lunch at the St. Joseph County Jail on July 22, 2023. 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.

Jiggetts alleges this happened when he was a pretrial detainee. “In evaluating the constitutionality of conditions or restrictions of pretrial detention . . . the proper inquiry is whether those conditions amount to punishment of the detainee.” Id. “[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. 389, 398 (2015) (quoting Bell). However, for a pre-trial detainee to establish a claim under the Fourteenth Amendment, “it will not be enough to show negligence or gross negligence.” Miranda v. Cty. of Lake, 900 F.3d 335, 353 (7th Cir. 2018).

Jiggetts found a rock in his lunch. When he reported this to guards, they promptly responded by examining the rock and his tooth. They took a picture and filed a report. By his description, they responded reasonably. Unfortunately, rocks and other natural contaminants are an inherent food hazard. See e.g. William Skipworth, Rocks And Insects Found Inside Groceries-Trader Joe's Recalls Four Products In One Week, Forbes https://www.forbes.com/sites/willskipworth/2023/07/28/rocks-and-insects-found-inside-groceries-trader-joes-recalls-four-products-in-one-week/?sh=556e3cbc12b3. It may have been negligent for the rock to have not been found before the food was served, but negligence does not state claim for a constitutional violation.

“The usual standard in civil cases is to allow defective pleadings to be corrected, especially in early stages, at least where amendment would not be futile.” Abu-Shawish v. United States, 898 F.3d 726, 738 (7th Cir. 2018). However, “courts have broad discretion to deny leave to amend where . . . the amendment would be futile.” Hukic v. Aurora Loan Servs., 588 F.3d 420, 432 (7th Cir. 2009). Such is the case here. For these reasons, this case is DISMISSED under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.

SO ORDERED


Summaries of

Jiggetts v. Airmart

United States District Court, Northern District of Indiana
Aug 3, 2023
3:23-CV-728-JD-JPK (N.D. Ind. Aug. 3, 2023)
Case details for

Jiggetts v. Airmart

Case Details

Full title:DEVANTE JIGGETTS, Plaintiff, v. AIRMART, Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, Northern District of Indiana

Date published: Aug 3, 2023

Citations

3:23-CV-728-JD-JPK (N.D. Ind. Aug. 3, 2023)