From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Park v. Police Woman

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION
Nov 19, 2015
CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:15-CV-3376 (S.D. Tex. Nov. 19, 2015)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:15-CV-3376

11-19-2015

SARAH PARK, Petitioner, v. POLICE WOMAN/POLICE PATROL, et al, Respondents.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Sarah Park is an inmate in the Harris County jail. She filed a complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging violations of her rights by a police officer, a fellow jail inmate, a jail psychiatrist, her court-appointed attorney, and an unnamed security guard.

Section 1915A of title 42 of the United States Code requires a federal district court to "review . . . a complaint in a civil action in which a prisoner seeks redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity." If the complaint presents no cognizable claims, the court must dismiss the complaint.

Park's complaint is not entirely clear, but it appears that she complains that the unnamed officer drew a gun on her before reholstering the gun, and threatened Park with a taser but did not actually use the taser. The fellow inmate threatened Park, but did not actually do anything to her. The psychiatrist stated that Park was "unorganized." The attorney was apparently rude to Park, and the security guard "verbally ass[au]lt[ed]" Park.

Section 1983 of title 42 of the United States Code provides for remedies against persons who, acting under color of state law, deprive others of rights secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States. Read in the most liberal light possible, Park alleges that an officer threatened, but did not use, force against her, that a fellow inmate threatened to, but did not, assault her, and that several other people treated her rudely. In the absence of any use of force or any injury other than hurt feelings, Park fails to identify any violation of a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States. She therefore fails to state a cognizable claim for relief under section 1983.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the complaint (Dkt. No. 1) is DISMISSED. It is FURTHER ORDERED that Park's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Dkt. No. 2) is DENIED AS MOOT.

SIGNED on this 19th day of November, 2015.

/s/_________

Kenneth M. Hoyt

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Park v. Police Woman

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION
Nov 19, 2015
CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:15-CV-3376 (S.D. Tex. Nov. 19, 2015)
Case details for

Park v. Police Woman

Case Details

Full title:SARAH PARK, Petitioner, v. POLICE WOMAN/POLICE PATROL, et al, Respondents.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION

Date published: Nov 19, 2015

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:15-CV-3376 (S.D. Tex. Nov. 19, 2015)