Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Waterman v. Tippie

United States District Court, D. Kansas

March 25, 2019

BRIAN MICHAEL WATERMAN, Plaintiff,
v.
MICHELLE TIPPIE, et al., Defendants.

          ORDER

          SAM A. CROW, U.S. DISTRICT SENIOR JUDGE

         This case is before the court for screening of plaintiff's amended complaint. Doc. No. 10. The court applies the same standards discussed in the court's order screening plaintiff's original complaint. Doc. No. 6. The court shall also rule upon motions listed as pending.

         I. SCREENING AMENDED COMPLAINT

         A. Count One

         In Count One plaintiff alleges that he was housed for five days in a cell where exhaust entering from the ventilation system caused plaintiff to suffer symptoms associated with carbon monoxide poisoning. Plaintiff has asthma which he asserts made him more susceptible to the health risks. He claims he had severe headaches and chest pain, and that he required a breathing treatment. Plaintiff claims that defendant Tippie was aware of this situation but refused plaintiff's requests to be moved to another cell. The court finds that plaintiff's additional allegations in the amended complaint are sufficient to describe an extreme condition which caused a substantial risk to plaintiff's health and, therefore, state a claim for relief against defendant Tippie.

         B. Count Two

         Plaintiff alleges that the inmates' meals were reduced perhaps to less than 1, 700 calories for two to four days in retaliation against some inmates' filing grievances concerning the food. Plaintiff asserts that before the rations were reduced, defendant Tippie responded to complaints by saying that the required amount of calories were being served and could be cut down. He claims that he was starving and his stomach hurt because he was suffering from an inadequate diet before the alleged retaliation.

         The court reviewed the standards governing this claim in the prior screening order. Applying those standards to the allegations in the amended complaint, the court finds that Count Two fails to state a claim.

         C. Count Three

         Plaintiff alleges that from November 28, 2018 to December 2, 2018, the heater to his housing pod was broken and that he suffered from cold temperatures without having access to a jacket or gloves or an extra blanket. Plaintiff alleges he only had one sheet and one blanket until December 2, 2018, when an extra blanket was provided.

         Plaintiff further alleges that he was placed in a segregation cell on December 21, 2018 where the temperatures were 50 degrees or below. Plaintiff was denied an extra blanket and was shivering at night in his clothes for a week's time before receiving an extra blanket.

         Plaintiff alleges that defendant Tippie was aware of these temperature conditions and denied plaintiff extra blankets or other means to maintain warmth.

         Mindful of the court's legal discussion in the prior screening order, the court finds these allegations are sufficient to ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.