Johnson v. McClain

Background

Jinja Kyng Pariah Johnson, who was incarcerated at Albion Correctional Facility, brought this self-represented action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The court had previously allowed her to proceed without prepaying the filing fee. Johnson alleged that, on several dates between January 2018 and February 2022, people sexually assaulted or harassed her because of her sexual orientation, attacked her, or poisoned her food while she was in jail. She also alleged that officers sexually assaulted her during her January 31, 2022 arrest. She named numerous individual and entity defendants and requested their prosecution for a hate crime and damages for pain and suffering.

Legal standard

Because Johnson was proceeding without a lawyer and without prepaying the filing fee, the court screened the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). The court was required to dismiss claims that were frivolous, malicious, failed to state a claim, or sought relief from an immune defendant. The court also had to read a self-represented complaint liberally, meaning it had to interpret the allegations in the way most favorable to identifying a potentially valid claim.

Discussion

To state a claim under § 1983, a plaintiff must allege facts showing that each defendant was personally and directly involved in violating the plaintiff’s constitutional rights. A defendant cannot be held liable merely because that defendant supervised or employed someone who allegedly violated the plaintiff’s rights.

The court concluded that Johnson did not allege facts showing how any named defendant was personally involved in the events underlying her claims. It therefore dismissed the claims for failure to state a claim under § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).

The court granted Johnson 30 days’ leave to amend because the complaint appeared to concern her arrest and later detention and she might be able to state a valid claim by attributing specific conduct to specific defendants. The court warned that if an amended complaint did not identify conduct by named defendants concerning the arrest and detention, the Clerk of Court would be directed to enter judgment.

State-law claims and appeal status

After dismissing the federal claims, the court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction, meaning authority to hear related state-law claims, over any state-law claims Johnson might have been asserting. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Johnson permission to appeal without prepaying fees.

Disposition

The complaint was dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), with 30 days’ leave to replead. The court declined supplemental jurisdiction over any state-law claims.