From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lamar v. Colorado State Penitentiary

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Oct 24, 2011
Civil Action No. 11-cv-01566-BNB (D. Colo. Oct. 24, 2011)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 11-cv-01566-BNB

10-24-2011

ANDREW MARK LAMAR, Plaintiff, v. COLORADO STATE PENITENTIARY, SUSAN JONES, Warden of C.S.P., KATHLEEN BOYD, NP (No. 12547), JOSEPH W. WRIGHT, Physician (No. 14549), DAVE PLOUGHE, (No. 12074), and PHIL DeFELICE, Defendants.


ORDER TO DISMISS IN PART AND TO DRAW IN PART

Plaintiff, /joidrew Mark Lamar, is in the custody of the Colorado Department of Corrections and currently is incarcerated at the. Colorado State Penitentiary in Cafion City, Colorado, pn June 15, 2011, Mr. Lamar, acting pro se, submitted to the Court a Prisoner Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 28 U.S.C. § 1343. Magistrate Judge Craig B. Shaffer reviewed the Complaint and entered an order on August 22, 2011, instructing Mr. Lamar to file an Amended Complaint within thirty days and to state how each named defendant personally participated in the alleged constitutional violations.

Mr. Lamar filed an Amended Complaint but failed to assert all claims on the complaint form. Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland gave Mr. Lamar an additional thirty days to file a prcjperly amended complaint. Magistrate Judge Boland also instructed Mr. Lamar that if he failed to comply within the time allowed the Court would proceed to review the merits of the Complaint he originally filed with the Court on June 15, 2011. Mr. Lamar now l^as failed to file a Second Amended Complaint within the time allowed. The Court, therefore, will proceed to review the merits of the June 15 Complaint.

Mr. Lamar was instructed in the August 22 Order that he must assert personal participation by Defendants Susan Jones, Dave Ploughe, and Phil DeFelice and explain what each defendant did to him, when the defendant did the action, how the action harmed him, and what specific legal right he believes the defendant violated. Mr. Lamar also was instructed in the August 22 Order that the Colorado State Penitentiary is immune from suit. Because Mr. Lamar failed to file a proper Second Amended Complaint, and the Court is reviewing only the merits of the claims asserted in the original Complaint, Defendants Colorado State Penitentiary, Jones, Ploughe, and DeFelice will be dismissed.

The Eighth Amendment claim Mr. Lamar asserts against Defendants Kathleen Boyd and Joseph W. Wright seeking money damages and declaratory relief will be drawn to a district! judge and to a magistrate judge. Accordingly, it is

ORDERED that the Complaint and claims asserted against Defendants Kathleen Boyd and Joseph W. Wright shall be drawn to a district judge and to a magistrate judge. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants Colorado State Penitentiary, Susan Jones, Dave Ploughe, and Phil DeFelice are dismissed. The Clerk of the Court is instructed to remove them as named parties to this action.

DATED at Denver, Colorado, this 24th day of October, 2011.

BY THE COURT:

LEWIS T. BABCOCK, Judge

United States District Court

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO


CERTIFICATE OF MAILING

Civil Action No. 11-CV-01566-BNB

Andrew Mark Lamar

Prisoner No. 113997

Colorado State Penitentiary

PO Box 777

Canon City, CO 81215- 0777

I hereby certify that I have mailed a copy of the ORDER to the above-named individuals on October 24, 2011.

GREGORY C. LANGHAM, CLERK

By ____________

Deputy Clerk


Summaries of

Lamar v. Colorado State Penitentiary

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Oct 24, 2011
Civil Action No. 11-cv-01566-BNB (D. Colo. Oct. 24, 2011)
Case details for

Lamar v. Colorado State Penitentiary

Case Details

Full title:ANDREW MARK LAMAR, Plaintiff, v. COLORADO STATE PENITENTIARY, SUSAN JONES…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Date published: Oct 24, 2011

Citations

Civil Action No. 11-cv-01566-BNB (D. Colo. Oct. 24, 2011)