From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Schaeffer v. Schamp

United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Jun 25, 2008
Civil Action No. 06 - 1516 (W.D. Pa. Jun. 25, 2008)

Summary

holding that plaintiff's "claims that he was placed in a hard cell for ten days without a mattress, soap, toilet paper, running water, legal supplies, his prescription medication and only received one meal a day" were insufficient to constitute Eighth Amendment violation

Summary of this case from Hester v. Phelps

Opinion

Civil Action No. 06 — 1516.

June 25, 2008


MEMORANDUM ORDER


The above captioned case was initiated by the filing of a Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (doc. no. 1) on November 14, 2006, and was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Lisa Pupo Lenihan for pretrial proceedings in accordance with the Magistrate Judges Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), and Rules 72.1.3 and 72.1.4 of the Local Rules for Magistrate Judges.

Magistrate Judge Lisa Pupo Lenihan filed a Report and Recommendation on May 28, 2008 (doc. no. 28), recommending that the Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (doc. no. 23) be granted. Plaintiff was served with the Report and Recommendation and advised that he had until June 16, 2008 to file objections to the Report and Recommendation. No objections have been filed.

After de novo review of the pleadings and documents in the case, together with the Report and Recommendation, the following order is entered:

AND NOW, this 25th day of June, 2008;
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (doc. no. 23) is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (doc. no. 28) of Magistrate Judge Lenihan dated May 28, 2008, is ADOPTED as the Opinion of the Court.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court mark this case CLOSED. AND IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that pursuant to Rule 4(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, Plaintiff has thirty (30) days to file a notice of appeal as provided by Rule 3 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.


Summaries of

Schaeffer v. Schamp

United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Jun 25, 2008
Civil Action No. 06 - 1516 (W.D. Pa. Jun. 25, 2008)

holding that plaintiff's "claims that he was placed in a hard cell for ten days without a mattress, soap, toilet paper, running water, legal supplies, his prescription medication and only received one meal a day" were insufficient to constitute Eighth Amendment violation

Summary of this case from Hester v. Phelps

finding that confinement in hard cell for ten days without a mattress does not constitute cruel and unusual punishment

Summary of this case from Gray v. Wakefield

finding that confinement in hard cell for ten days without a mattress does not constitute cruel and unusual punishment

Summary of this case from Jones v. Fisher

In Schaeffer v. Schamp, 2008 WL 2553474, at *6 (W.D. Pa. June 25, 2008), the Court concluded that the plaintiff failed to state a claim of cruel and unusual punishment where he alleged that, for a period of 10 days, he was deprived of toilet paper, as well as a mattress, soap, running water, legal supplies, and his prescription medication, and he only received one meal a day.

Summary of this case from RUDACILLE v. HOKE
Case details for

Schaeffer v. Schamp

Case Details

Full title:STONEY LEE SCHAEFFER, Plaintiff, v. CORRECTIONAL OFFICER, SGT. W. SCHAMP…

Court:United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania

Date published: Jun 25, 2008

Citations

Civil Action No. 06 - 1516 (W.D. Pa. Jun. 25, 2008)

Citing Cases

Williams v. Campbell

However, numerous courts in this circuit have concluded that failure to provide an inmate with a mattress for…

RUDACILLE v. HOKE

He does not allege that he was deprived of toilet paper any longer than one day. In Schaeffer v. Schamp, 2008…