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.

Fletcher v. United States

United States District Court, D. New Hampshire

July 11, 2016

Neilson Dain Fletcher, Kevin McClure, John Sirsi, Todd Klink, Charle Denver Phillips, and Chris Osterloth,
v.
United States of America, Federal Bureau of Prisons, Federal Correctional Institution-Berlin Warden Esker Lee Tatum, Clint L. Cranford, FNU Bailey, FNU Johnson, Federal Correction Institution-Safford Warden Susan McClintock, S. Warner, and John Doe

          Neilson Dain Fletcher, Plaintiff, Pro Se.

          REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

          ANDREA K. JOHNSTONE, Magistrate Judge.

         Neilson Dain Fletcher, an inmate at the Federal Correctional Institution ("FCI") in Berlin, New Hampshire, has filed a complaint (doc. no. 1) seeking damages and injunctive relief. The complaint is before the court for preliminary review under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915A and 1915(e)(2), and LR 4.3(d).

         Preliminary Review Standard

         For the purposes of this court's preliminary review under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915A, 1915(e)(2), and LR 4.3(d), the court construes pro se pleadings liberally in determining whether the plaintiff has stated a claim. See Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007). Disregarding legal conclusions, the court considers whether the factual content in the pleading and inferences reasonably drawn therefrom, taken as true, state a claim to relief. Hernandez-Cuevas v. Taylor, 723 F.3d 91, 102-03 (1st Cir. 2013) (citing Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009)).

         Background

         Fletcher asserts that in 2014, while he was an inmate at FCI Safford in Arizona, defendants instituted disciplinary proceedings against him in a manner he asserts violated his federal constitutional rights, violated his rights under the Religious Land Use and Institutional Persons Act ("RLUIPA"), and rendered defendants liable to him for tortious conduct. The acts forming the basis of Fletcher's claims all occurred in Arizona, during his incarceration at a Federal Bureau of Prisons facility in that state.

         Discussion

         I. ]Plaintiffs Other Than Fletcher

         The Complaint (doc. no. 1) lists, in addition to Fletcher, Kevin McClure, John Sirsi, Todd Klink, Charle Denver Phillips, and Chris Osterloth as plaintiffs. Fletcher, however, is the only plaintiff who signed the complaint. Fletcher is litigating this matter pro se.

         As the only person to have signed the complaint, Fletcher is the only person who may be deemed to be a plaintiff at this time. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 11(a) (requiring personal signature of unrepresented party on each filing). Further, in this court, pro se plaintiffs cannot litigate on behalf of others. See 28 U.S.C. § 1654; LR 83.2(d). Accordingly, Fletcher cannot advance claims on behalf of McClure, Sirsi, Klink, Phillips, or Osterloth. All claims asserted on behalf of McClure, Sirsi, Klink, Phillips, or Osterloth, should be dismissed without prejudice, and those parties should be dropped from this action.

         II. ]Esker Tatum

         Fletcher has named FCI Berlin Warden Esker Tatum as a defendant. Fletcher has not alleged facts, however, giving rise to claims against Tatum, or any other FCI Berlin employee. Accordingly, the claims against Tatum in the ...


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.