Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout00-00571 MELVIN LEE, DY-8704, PETITIONER V. SCI CAMP HILL C,O, J.v, VALENTIN, DEFENDANTS AND NOW, this , I. ~~liftl&illJliolliili,[ilL : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIIA 00-0571 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT ~day of February, 2000, the application to proceed in forma pauperis, IS GRANTED with respect to filing fees and service. Melvin Lee, DY -8704, Pro se SRCF 801 Butler Pike Mercer, PA 16137 :saa l , ,. .. , I.~ ',I~~~!'l FEe - 2 20a~\ ~,I APPENDIX A APPLICATION FOR PROCEEDING WITHOUT FULL PREPAYMENT OF FEES AND COSTS Mplu;n Too No. J.O()O - 57/ &I~ nY-R704,SR~F' 801 Butler pike Mercer, Pa. 16137 Name of Petitioner/Appellant v. _$.C.I CAMPHILL C.O. J. V. VALENTIN BOX ~OO CAMPHILL, PA. 1700-0200 Name of Respondent/Appellee Application to Proceed In Fo~ Pauperis PLEASE READ CAREFULLY AND FULLY COMPLETE EACH SECTION. 1. X 2. X 3. I am willing to pursue my claims in this action under the new provisions of the Pennsylvania Prison Litigation Reform Act, understanding that pursuing my claim requires payment of a partial filing fee and deduction of sums from my prison account when funds exist until the filing fee has been paid in full. I have enclosed an executed Authorization form which authorizes the Institution holding me in custody to transmit to the Clerk a certified copy of my trust account for the past six (6) months as well as payments from the account in the amounts specified by 42 Pa C.S. ~ 6602. Have you, prior to the filing of the petition for review or appeal in this action and while a prisoner as that term is defined in 42 Pa C.S. ~ 6601, brought 3 or more actions or appeals in a court that were dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted? Yes No X ~ '~"~~~R-. ..... ~ (a) If the answer is "yes," are you now seeking relief because you are under imminent danger of serious physical injury? Yes No x (b) If yes, please explain in detail why you are under imminent danger of serious physical injury: 4. (a) Are you presently employed at the Institution? Yes No X (b) If yes, what is your monthly compensation? $ 5. Do you own any cash or other property; have a bank account; or receive money from any source? Yes No x If the answer is "yes" to any of the above, describe each source and the amount involved. NONE I certify under penalty of true and correct. Executed on &\ ~ ~ I (J 0 (Date) perjury that the foregoing is tr;J.~~ - Signature of Petitioner/Appellant This certification is executed pursuant to lS'Pa C.S. S 4902 (Section 4902 of the Crimes Code pertaining to perjury) . "' _J_ -~ ",,~",-- . APPENDIX B AUTHORIZATION TO HAVE FONDS REMOVED FROM YOUR INMATE ACCOUNT At1'.rHORIZATION (Prisoner's Aooount Only) Case No. NOTE: Completing this authorization form satisfies your obligation under 42 Pa C.S. ~ 6602 to submit a certified copy of your trust fund account. I, MELVIN LEE request and authorize the agency holding me in custody to send to the Clerk of the Commonwealth Court, a certified copy of the statement for the past six months of my trust fund account (or institutional equivalent) at the institution where I am incarcerated. I further request and authorize the agency holding me in custody to calculate and disburse funds from my trust account (or institutional equivalent) in the amounts specified by 42 Pa C.S. ~ 6602. This authorization is furnished in connection with the filing of a civil action or appeal, and I understand that the filing fee is $35 for original jurisdiction actions and $55 for appellate jurisdiction actions. I also understand tha.t the entire filing fee will be deducted from my account regardless of the outcome of my civil action or appeal. This authoriza.tion shall apply to any other agency into whose custody I may be transferred. Date JANUARY ~900 , - ~"'~~ Si nature of Prisoner MELVIN EE, DY-8704 ~~~. "II< - , ... IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA MELVIN LEE, Plaintiff, Docket No, 2000-571 v, SCI-CAMP HILL, C.O, J, V, VALENTIN, Defendants PRAECIPE FOR ENTRY OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: ~ J--. "'~-""..;- Please enter my appearance on behalf of the Defendants in the above-captioned matter, Respectfully submitted, / / Ray nd W, Dorian As stant Counsel Attorney I.D, No. 48148 P A Department of Corrections Office ofC.hiefCounsel 55 Utley Drive Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717) 731-0444 Dated: February 17, 2000 -. I_~._~_~",'i/$l"~; . ,. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA MELVIN LEE, Plaintiff, Docket No. 2000-571 v, SCI-CAMP HILL, C,O. J, V, VALENTIN, Defendants CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I am this day depositing in the U.S. mail a true and correct copy of the foregoing Praecipe for Entry of Appearance upon the person(s) and in the manner indicated below, Service by-first class mail addressed as follows: Melvin Lee, DY -8704 SCI-Mercer 80 I Butler Pike Mercer, PA 16137 Raym d W. Dorian Assis t Counsel Attorney LD, No. 48148 P A Department of Corrections Office of Chief Counsel 55 Utley Drive Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717) 731-0444 Dated: February 17,2000 - f1f",,' r~ , --"-"~ . SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR CASE NO: 2000-00571 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND ", LEE MELVIN VS S C I CPL. MICHAEL BARRICK , Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County, Pensyl vania , who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE was served upon VALENTIN J V C 0 the DEFENDANT , at 0013:40 HOURS, on the 7th day of February, 2000 at DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS 2500 LISBURN ROAD CAMP HILL, PA 17001-0200 by handing to BEN LIVINGOOD a true and attested copy of COMPLAINT & NOTICE together with IN NEGLIGENCE and at the same time directing His attention to the contents thereof, Sheriff's Costs: Docketing Service Affidavit Surcharge 6,00 .00 .00 10.00 ,00 16,00 So Answers: r~~-t:~t R, Thomas Kline 02/09/2000 7 Sworn and Subscribed to before By: me this ;,'~ So day of LJ~ c2avu A,D. Yr"--' Cl 'fh..-M. J ^~4" Prothonotary I -~- .~ -- "";ill"""HIWI,:;:'il>. SHERIFF'S RETURN - REGULAR CASE NO: 2000-00571 P COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA: COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND LEE MELVIN VS S C I CPL. MICHAEL BARRICK , Sheriff or Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County, Pensyl vania , who being duly sworn according to law, says, the within COMPLAINT & NOTICE was served upon S C I CAMP HILL the DEFENDANT , at 0013:40 HOURS, on the 7th day of February 2000 at DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS 2500 LISBURN ROAD CAMP HILL, PA 17001-0200 by handing to BEN LIVINGOOD a true and attested copy of COMPLAINT & NOTICE together with OF NEGLIGENCE and at the same time directing His attention to the contents thereof, Sheriff's Costs: Docketing Service Aff idavi t Surcharge 18,00 9.30 ,00 10.00 .00 37.30 So Answers: r~~"~t R. Thomas Kline <z.. me this 029- day of // 02/09/2000 Sworn and Subscribed to before By: l,L'Q; OUPV A.D. '" C 'n,,.dp,,,-, ~ .. r thonotary ,) ,','4-__, ~ ~ h ~"_"'_l;oil"". IN TaE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS FOR CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL DIVISION MELVIN LEE, Plaintiff Ci~il Action-In Law DK. No. J()OO -57/ C'....;,;,( T~ vs. S.C.!. CAMPHILL . C.O. J. V. VAV\.NTIN Defendant The Honorable J . NOTICE TO DEFEND You have been sued in Court. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages you must take action with in Twenty (20) days after this complaint and notice are served, By entering a written appearance personally or by Attorney, and filing in writing with the court your defense or objections to the claims set forth against you. You are warned that if you failt to do so, the case may proceed without you and a judgement may be entered against you by the court without further notice for any money claimed in the complaint or for any other claim of relief r€>- Quested by the Plaintiff. You may lose money or property or other rights important to you. You should take this paper to your Lawyer at once. If you do not have a lawyer or cannot afford one, you are to telephone the Office set forth below to find out where you can get legal help. CONTACT: tumbe.la.nd. COLl(\~t l3QR fh..<;oc J.. LibeR+j Avenue Ca.rli~)e PA /70/3 J ~-' - 1- "'=-~\'-<I,'c- IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS FOR CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL DIVISION MELVIN LEE Plaintiff CIVIL ACTION- IN LAW DK. C. V No. .2.A.rvv.. 5'1/ ~ -u.~ vs. The Honorable S.C.!. CAMPHILL C.O. J.V. VALENTIN Defendant's J. COMPLAINT OF NEGLIGENCE I. JURISDICTION 1) This Court has jurisdiction to convene, hear, and adjudicate this action pursuant to 42 Pa. C.S.A. 930, et. sec., Pa. R.C.P. 1007.1 Specifically, a jury trial is demanded. II. PARTIES 2) The Plaintiff is Melvin Lee an adult male currently residing at SRCF/Mercer, 801 Butler Pike, Mercer, Pa. 16137, Herein known as Plaintiff. 3) The Defendant S.C.I. Camphill, Department of Corrections a State Government entity located at CampHill, Pa. 1700-0200. They are being sued in their Official capacity. 4) The Defendant Corrections Officer J.V. Valentin, an agent of the Department of Corrections at S.C. I. Camphill. He is being sued in his individual and Official capacity. III. STATEMENT OF FACTS 5) ON or about August 21st, 1999, during mainline A.M., I was standing at my door tucking my shirt into my pants before I left my cell in keeping with Institutuonal Policy. ,) \'.1-0 L" 1- j~'li.\-_ 6) As I reached for the door to exit my cell" The door was suddenly slammed shut by officer J.V. Valentin. Thereby catching my right hand between the door and the door jamb. 1 7) I yelled in pain, as he walked away. When I finally got his atte~'tion, and complained that my finger was damaged, he asked to see it. I held up my hand at the door, He looked at it and askecl me did I want to go to the Dispensary. I said yes, Please. As he walked away he said he would take care of it. 8) Never the less I waited for him ot get my c100r open in pain. 9) When doors were opened for mainline returns, Thats when I c left my cell,.to obtain a pass for the dispensary given me by the Supervisor. Approx. 20 minutes later. 10) When I got to the dispensary I was examined by a doctor, after which a nurse taped my damaged finger and the one next to it, and was told to come back in (2) days for an X-Ray. 11) I returned back to the dispensary two (2) days later where my hand was X-Rayed and it was found that the 3RD (third) finger on my ~ight hand was broken. 12) After which plaintiffs finger was put into a splint for approximate (6) six weeks. 13) I was then put under cell restriction for (10) ten days. Which means, I was only allowed out of my cell for meals and to attend the infirmary. I couldn't go to yard for recreation. 14) Approximately 8-10 days later when 1 could write I approached the supervisor of my block and asked for a Grievance. The Sergent's named was Lucas, and he told me that I would have to go thru the Unit Manager in order to obtain a grievance. After I had told him What it was for. J_ ~)~!&iIWJ!M,o 15) So I obtained a request slip-DC135 to staff member, filled , I it out to the Unit Managee that day which was the 9/01/99. 16) I never got an answer from the Unit Manager, So I wrote to Inmate Program Director, Mr. M. Kazor, on 9/15/99 He responded 15 days later instructing my Counselor to give me a grievance. Also stamped on his reply were the dates 9/30/99 received, and 10/01/99 instructing my Counselor Mr. Fry to give me one. 17) When I filled out the grievance and forwarded it to the grievance Dept. , They sent it back, saying, I had taken to long. from a Mr. Ben Livingood, on 10/07/99 who is the corrections superintendent at S.C.I. Camphi1l. I have a copy of the reply from Mr. Livingood and from the Program director Mr. Kazor. 18) The final prog~osis is that the Plaintiff will never have 100% use of the Finger. IV. CLAIMS OF RELIEF 19) The defendants, S.C.I. Camphill State Correctional Insti- tution, Corrections Officer J.V. Valentin, are constrained by law and the Constitutional Amenities confered upon Plaintiff, with developement and implementation of policy and training to ensure and protect the safety of their charges in their care. 20) Plaintiff alleges that the acts and omissions of the defendants offend certain constitutional amenities, Specifically, the 8th amendment, (deliberate indifference) ; (cruel and unusual -, punishment); (wanton and unnecessary infliction of pain). 21) Defendants owed Plaintiff a duty of reasonable care that is to exercise caution in the discharg~ng of his/her duties. _ ..J,o......,,,....,. 22) Plaintiff alleges that defendant J,V. Valentin breached that duty by not exhibiting caution when he closed the cell door of the plaintiffs cell. Also exhibiting reckless behavior. 23) Plaintiff alleges that D.O.C. failed to adequately train p~rsonel in exercising and carrying out his/her duties. 24) Plaintiff alleges that the closing of the cell door upon plaintiffs hand amounted to mere negligence, malicious and sadistic disregard and intentional infliction of pain and suffering. This constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. V. REQUESTED Wherefore, Plaintiff requests that the Court Grant The F01~owing Relief: A) Issue a declaratory judgement stating that: 1) The damages caused by defendants violated the petitioner's rights under the 8th Amendment of the United States Constitution, and constituted both negligence and deliberate indifference under State law. B) Award Compensatory Damages in the following amounts: 1) $50,000.00 severally against the Department of Corrections for failing to put qualified personel in place. And as a result, The physical suffering sustained because of negligence by an employee. And, an additional $50,000.00 for the permenant and future complic- ations his/her negligence has caused. 2) $20,000.00 severally against defendant J.V. Valentin for physical and emotional injuries sustained as a result of defendants negligence. ~"t"__'M..,rn",i; C) Award punitive damages in the following amounts: 1) $50,000.00 severally against defendant S.C.I. CampHill 2) $20,000.00 against defendant C.O. J.V. Valentin D) Grant such other as is may appear that Plaintiff is entitled. Respectfully Submitted, .~~ <:!/;,VIN LEE, DY-8704 Dated: d- I J, ~ ) DO ~.""'~Iil~ CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I The undersigned, being the Plaintiff herein, Submitts that the Attached, Notice To Defend and Complaint in Trespass, has been served on the following persons, in accordance with Pennsylvania Rule of Court, and on this ~day of 2000. By First Class u.S. Mail Service. J 0 1111 ~ IV ( Camp Hill, S.C.!. Box 200 Camphill, Pa. 01700 Corrections Officer J.V. Valentin c/o S.C.I. Camp Hill Box 200 Camp Hill, Pa. 01700 '~-~ ~IN LEE, Y-8704 801 Butler Pike Mercer, Pa. 16137 1__~_;t,iM STATEMENT OF VERIFICATION The undersigned, being the plaintiff herein, submits that the Attached, Notice to Defend and Complaint, shall be the represents of the plaintiff herein. He therefore, under penalty of law, to wit, 18 Pa. C.S.A. S4904. Attests the correctness of the statements contained herein as True and Correct to best of his knowledge and belief. l1[~~ MELVIN LEE, DY-8704 Plaintiff Dated: 0 ~6 ~..~lIC:' Melvin Lee IN THE COURT OF CCMI10N PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA VS. No. 2000-571 Civil Term SCI Camp Hill Deparbnent of Transportation CIVIL ACTION - LAW C 0 J V Valentin COURT OF CCMI1CJN PLEAS MIDDLE DISTRcr COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Please acknowledge receipt of this case by signing and dating this document. RECORD RECEIVED: Date: )...- "P ~c. <:I ~/a~~ . (si ature & title) -". - ~. ~".>" 1__"'f"~<:"~1lM()b: ~ IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL DIVISION MELVIN LEE, Plaintiff, Docket No. 2000-571 v. SCI-CAMP HILL and C.O. J. V. VALENTIN, Defendants NOTICE OF REMOVAL TO: Melvin Lee, DY-8704 SCI-Mercer 801 Butler Pike' Mercer, PA 16137 Prothonotary Cumberland County Courthouse One Courthouse Square Carlisle, PA 17013-3387 Please take notice that a Petition for Removal was filed in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania at Civil Action No. ,on . February 23, 2000. I certify that the attached copy of the Petition for Removal is a true and correct copy of the original which was filed in the Office of the Clerk of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, Respectfully submitted, (t: ~riM Assistant Counsel Attorney LD, No, 48148 ~ I"" ~Ii&~",l;t"";;."..:,,., , P A Department of Corrections Office of Chief Counsel 55 Utley Drive Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717) 731-0444 Dated: February 23, 2000 2 ~ ~ ~ I_--...!folilk.~....~~~~; , IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYL VANIA MELVIN LEE, Plaintiff, Civil Action No. v. SCI-CAMP HILL and C.O. J. V. VALENTIN, Defendants PETITION FOR REMOVAL Defendants, SCI-Camp Hill and C.O. Jack Valentin, by and through their attorney, respectfully petition this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ~144l(a), for removal of the instant matter from the Court ofConUnon Pleas of Cumberland County. As grounds therefor, Defendants present as follows: 1. On February 1,2000, Plaintiff commenced an action in the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County at Docket No. 2000-571. A copy of the Complaint in that action was hand-delivered by a Deputy Sheriff of Cumberland County to the Defendants on February 7, 2000. 2, . The Plaintiff, a former inmate at the State Correctional Institution at Camp Hill ("SCI -Camp Hill"), alleges that Defendant Valentin slamined a cell door on his hand while he ATTACHMENT "0"0 ~ .J___Hittl,.j.J1jl~": was incarcerated there, A copy of the Complaint is submitted herewith and is incorporated herein by reference. 3. This action is a civil action under state law and under 42 U ,S.C, ~ 1983, 4. This Court has jurisdiction over federal claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C, ~ 1343, and such action is removable to this Court by virtue of28 U.s.C. ~1441(a). 5. Notice of Removal has been provided to the Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, and to the Prothonotary of the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, 6. Removal of this action does not waive any defenses to which the Defendants are entitled by virtue of the Eleventh Amendment. WHEREFORE, Defendants pray that the aforementioned action now proceeding against them in the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County be removed from there to this Court. Respectfully submitted, P A Department of Corrections Office of Chief Counsel 55 Utley Drive Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717) 731-0444 Dated: FebrulU)' 23, 2000 2 ,~ -"',"~- - I~",," -~I_I~>,,,,,,,iI. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS FOR CUMBERLAND COUNTY. PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL DIVISION MELVIN LEE, Plaintiff Ciuil Action-In Law OK. No. ,~'0Cl-57 / vs. S.C.I. CAMPHILL C.O. J. V. VA:LANTIN Defendant The Honorable J. NOTICE TO DEFEND You have been sued in Court. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages you must take action with in Twenty (20) days after this complaint andinotice are served, By entering a written appearance personally or by Attorney, and filing in writing with the court your defense or objections to the claims set forth against you. You are warned that if you failt to do so, the case may proceed without you and a judgement may be entered against you by the court without further notice for any money claimed in the complaint or for any other claim of relief re.. Quested by the Plaintiff. You may lose money or property or other rights important to you. You should take this paper to your Lawyer at once. If you do not h~~e a lawyer or cannot afford one, you are to telephone the Office set forth below to find out where you can get legal help. CONTACT: ,...~ r' v r~OM "._--, ..- f.'. ,',f) ..l ',i. , ~ ..;"! .: , i r', .':"! ,",: ;.;, ;t: . 1 I~er(~ :" ;ajip(';~~~Df11" 000' . ..._m~/ Prothonotary -. . ~~ ',. ~- . ~ ~"~ "" " - .~~~ ~~ ~ - Lm--, ",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,-budJ..< IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS FOR CUMBERL&ND COUNTY. PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL DIVISION MELVIN LEE Plaintiff CIVIL ACTION- IN LAW DK. C.V No. vs. The Honorable S.C.I. CAMPHILL C.O. J.V. VALENTIN Defendant's J. COMPLAINT OF NEGLIGENCE I. JURISDICTION 1) This Court has jurisdiction to convene, hear, and adjudicate this action pursuant to 42 Pa. C.S.A. 930. et. sec.. Pa. R.C.P. 1001.1 Specifically, a jury trial is demanded. II. PARTIES 2) The Plaintiff is Melvin Lee an adult male currently residing at SRCF/Mercer, 801 Butler Pike, Mercer, Pa. 16137, Herein known as Plaintiff. 3) The Defendant S.C.I. Camphill, Department of Corrections a State Government entity ~ocated at CampHill, Pa. 1700-0200. They are being sued in their Official capacity. 4) The Defendant Corrections Officer J.V. Valentin, an agent of the Department of Corrections at S.C.I. Camphill. He is being sued in his individual and Official capacity. III. STATEMENT OF FACTS 5) ON or about August 21st, 1999, during mainline A.M., I was standing at my door tucking my shirt into my pants before I left my , cell in keeping with Institutuonal Policy. , /- ,. " ...,;' I ,,~~~- ~" - ,.J _""""""",,,,,,"'-'.';';-_..,1'.' - .~~............ - 6) As I reached for the door to exit my cell, The door was suddenly slammed shut by officer J.V. Valentin. Thereby catching my right hand between the door and the door jamb. 1 7) I yelled in pain, as he walked away. When I finally got I his atte&,tion, and complained that my finger was damaged, he asked to see it. I held up my hand at the door, He looked at it and asked me did I want to go to the Dispensary. I said yes, Please. As he walked away he said he would take care of it. 8) Never the less I waited for him ot get my door open in pain. 9) When doors were opened for mainline returns, Thats when I left my cell_to obtain a pass for the dispensary given me by the , Supervisor. Approx. 20 minutes later. 10) When I got to the dispensary I was examined by a doctor, after which a nurse taped my damaged finger and the one next to it, and was told to come back in (2) days for an X-Ray. 11) I returned back to the dispensary two (2) days later where my hand was X-Rayed and it was found that the 3RD (third) finger on my right hand was. broken. 12) After which plaintiffs finger was put into a splint for approximate (61 six weeks. i 13) I was then put under cell restriction for (10) ten days. Which means, I was only allowed out of my cell for meals and to attend the infirmary. I couldn't go to yard for recreation. 14) Approximately 8-10 days later when I could write I approached the supervisor of my block and asked for a Grievance. The Sergent's named was Lucas, and he told me that I would have to go thru the Unit Manager in order to obtain a grievance. After I had told him What it was for. ~~~~ 11 -. .l ill ' .J_'~"",~:'_'L_--"_="'"'' 15) So I obtained a request / it out to the Unit Managee that slip-DC135 to staff member, filled . day which was the 9/01/99. 16) I never got an answer from the Unit Manager. So I wrote to Inmate Program Director, Mr. M. Kazor, on 9/15/99 He responded 15 days later instructing my Counselor to give me a grievance. Also stamped on his reply were the dates 9/30/99 received, and 10/01/99 instructing my Counselor Mr. Fry to give me one. 17) When I filled out the grievance and forwarded it to the grievance Dept. , They sent it back, saying, I had taken to long. from a Mr. Ben Livingood, on 10/07/99 who is the corrections superintendent at S.C.I. Camphill. I have a copy of the reply from Mr. Livingood and from the Program director Mr. Kazor. 18) The final prognosis is that the Plaintiff will never have 100% use of the Finger. IV. CLAIMS OF RELIEF 19) The defendants, S.C.I. Camphill State Correctional Insti- tution, Corrections Officer J.V. Valentin, are constrained by law and the Constitutional Amenities confered upon Plaintiff, with developement and implementation of policy and training to ensure and protect the safety of their charges in their care. 20) Plaintiff alleges that the acts and omissions of the defendants offend certain constitutional amenities, Specifically, the 8th amendment, (deliberate indifference) : (cruel and unusual - punishment); (wanton and unnecessary infliction of pain). 21) Defendants owed Plaintiff a duty of reasonable care that is to exercise caution in the discharg~ng of his/her duties. I~__"""""",."'N'" 22) Plaintiff alleges that defendant J,V. Valentin breached that duty by not exhibiting caution when he closed 'the cell door of the plaintiffs cell. Also exhibiting reckless behavior. 23) Plaintiff alleges that D.O.C. failed to adequately train personel in exercising and carrying out his/her duties. 24) Plaintiff alleges that the closing of the cell door upon plaintiffs hand amounted to mere negligence, malicious and sadistic disregard and intentional infliction of pain and suffering. This constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. V. REQUESTED Wherefore, Plaintiff requests that the Court Grant The Foldowing Relief: A) Issue a declaratory judgement stating that: 1) The damages caused by defendants violated the petitioner's rights I under the 8th Amendment of the United States Constitution, and constituted both negligence and deliberate indifference under State law. B) Award Compensatory Damages in the following amounts: 1) $50,000.00 severally against the Department of Corrections for failing to put qualified personel in place. And as a result, The physical suffering sustained because of negligence by an employee. And, an additional $50,000.00 for the permenant and future complic- ations his/her negligence has caused. 2) $20,000.00 severally against defendant J.V. Valentin for physical and emotional injuries sustained as a result of defendants negligence. r' . -. ",.j - _" I w,jJ , ~~ ~ ~,~""'~, '..",-""..""",-",., C) Award punitive damages in the following amounts: 1) $50,000.00 severally against defendant S.C.I. CampHill 2) $20,000.00 against defendant c.o. J.V. Valentin D) Grant such other as is may appear that Plaintiff is entitled. Respectfully Submitted, l4~04e~/ LVIN LEE,'DY~8704 Dated:~ I I . I. I __"".,l;"""~"",,,",," . ' . . , I CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I The undersigned, being the Plaintiff herein, Submitts that the Attached, Notice To Defend and Complaint in Trespass, has been served on the following persons, in accordance with Pennsylvania Rule of Court, and on this~day of 'JonUlln/ , f 2000, By First Class U.S. Mail Service. Camp Hill ,$ . C. I. Box 200 Camphill, Pa. 01700 Corrections Officer J.V. Valentin c/o S.C.I. Camp Hill Box 200 Camp Hill, Pa. 01700 t4vk/~,-~ ME IN LEE, Y-8704 801 Butler Pike Mercer, Pa. 16137 ........= > ou~ . . . , . ~~""" - "__"MI"!;.:],"''''.''..' . .~ -;.' STATEMENT OF VERIFICATION The undersigned, being the plaintiff herein, submits that the Attached, Notice to Defend and Complaint, shall be the represents of the plaintiff herein. He therefore, under penalty of law, to wit, 18 Pa. C.S.A. 54904, Attests the correctness of the statements contained herein as True and Correct to best of his knowledge and belief. h[Ll~ MELVIN LEE, DY-8704 Plaintiff Dated: 611'J.~\oo ~ ~ ~'" -, ~ ~ . _-"'d~~~,,,L, . , IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYL VANIA MELVIN LEE, Plaintiff, Civil Action No, v. SCI-CAMP HILL and c.o. J. V, VALENTIN, Defendants ~ CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I am this day depositing in the U.S. mail a true and correct copy of the foregoing Petition for Removal upon the person(s) and in the marmer indicated below. Service by-first class mail addressed as follows: Melvin Lee, D Y -8704 SCI-Mercer 801 Butler Pike Mercer, PA 16137 d W. Dorian Assi t Counsel Attorney LD. No, 48148 P A Department of Corrections Office of Chief Counsel 55 Utley Drive Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717)731-0444 Dated: February 23, 2000 l "# - - '.;- . I .......... ~ ..""""....,,-- . IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA MELVIN LEE, Plaintiff, Docket No, 2000-571 v. SCI-CAMP HILL and C.O. J. V. VALENTIN, Defendants CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I am this day depositing in the U,S, mail a true and correct copy of the foregoing Notice of Removal upon the person(s) and in the manner indicated below. Service by-first class mail addressed as follows: Prothonorary Cumberland County Courthouse One Courthouse Square Carlisle, PA 17013-3387 Melvin Lee, DY -8704 SCI-Mercer 801 Butler Pike Mercer, PA 16137 2." /// / Ray nd W, Dorian ASSistant Counsel Attorney LD. No. 48148 P A Department of Corrections Office of Chief Counsel 55 Utley Drive Camp Hill, P A 17011 (717) 731-0444 Dated: February 23, 2000 ;lili1llill'--=~~'-"''MUI::iilli~-''''~~''''i~~iliIli",''<i:l~I'li!>ffi!,e;;;i~~;-'~~ "'~ ~~" ~ "" <~, ~, " ~_.~"'~........ " ~~~ . \ ~ "'~-" .. I ,. AO 72A (Rev,8/82) ~~~~ <, t . 'iiIIi:;;ili~Mi<' 06 - .s~1 Ctv~L~~ IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA MELVIN LEE, Plaintiff vs. CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:CV-OO-0326 SCI-CAMP HILL and J. V. VALENTIN, Defendants FilED HARRISBURG, PA i\.PR 6 2000 o R D E R : ,{ c. D'ANDREA, Cl , " THE BACKGROUND OF THIS ORDER IS AS FOLLOWS:-- Doputy Oleri. The pro se plaintiff, Melvin Lee, currently incarcerated at SCI-Mercer, Pennsylvania, but formerly imprisoned at SCI-Camp Hill, Pennsylvania, filed this action in state court, alleging both eighth amendment and state-law claims. (Complaint, 9 V.A) , The plaintiff avers that defendant, J.V. Valentin, a guard at Camp Hill, shut a cell door on the plaintiff's hand, causing permanent injury to one finger. The defendants removed the action here on the basis of federal jurisdiction. We are considering the report and recommendation of the magistrate judge. The magistrate judge conducted a sua sponte review of the complaint under 28 D.S.C. 9 1915A and concluded that the averments of the complaint did not rise to the level of an eight amendment claim. He recommended that the complaint be - ,. .f " AO 72A (Rev,8/82) '- "o"~If!j'.lc" dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. The plaintiff filed no objections to the report. We will accept the recommendation that the complaint sets forth no eighth amendment claim. However, we cannot accept the recommendation that the complaint be dismissed. Since the complaint still sets forth a seemingly valid state-law claim, we will instead remand the action to state court for resolution of the state-law claim. See Carneqie-Mellon University v. Cohill, 484 U,S. 343, 108 S,Ct, 614, 98 L.Ed.2d 720 (1988). Accordingly, this 6th April, 2000, upon consideration of the report of the magistrate judge, filed February 29, 2000, to which no objections have been filed, and independent review of the record, it is ordered that: 1. The plaintiff's eighth amendment claim is dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. 2, The Clerk of Court shall remand this action to the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, for resolution of the remaining state-law claim. 3. The Clerk of Court shall also close this file. /.1-.1{/-/up1 William W. Ca United States Judge 2 .--- "' ~...,."'IlIltilffi>;i.,. f u.s. District Court Middle District of Pennsylvania (Harrisburg) TERMED R/R PROSE REMAND CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 00-CV-326 Lee v. SCI-Camp Hill, et al Assigned to: Judge william W Caldwell Demand: $0,000 42041 Lead Docket: None Dkt # in Cumberland Common PI : is 2000-571 Filed: 02/23/00 Jury demand: Defendant Nature of Suit: 530 Jurisdiction: Federal Question Cause: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights Act MELVIN LEE plaintiff Melvin Lee [COR LD NTC] [PRO SE] SCI-ME SCI at Mercer P.O. Box 530 801 Butler Pike Mercer, PA 16137 Mercer 412-662-1837 v. SCI-CAMP HILL defendant Raymond W. Dorian [COR LD NTC] Office of Chief Counsel PA Dept of Corrections 55 Utley Drive Camp Hill, PA 17011 717-731-0444 C,O, J. V, VALENTIN defendant Raymond W. Dorian (See above) [COR LD NTC] Docket as of April 10, 2000 8:49 am Certified from Date " ~;,i ;"" ,.... Proceedings include all events, TERMED 1:00cv326 Lee v, SCI-Camp Hill, et al R/R PROSE REMAND 2/23/00 1 PETITION FOR REMOVAL from Cumberland Cty Common Pleas Court, Case Number: 2000-571. Jury trial demanded. N/C to cnsl, Receipt #: III 130644 Amt: $150.00 (sc) [Entry date 02/24/00] 2/24/00 REMARK - Copy of civil cover sheet, petition for removal, and docket to MJ Blewitt, Case file to Scranton. Copy of docket to J. Caldwell, (sc) [Entry date 02/24/00] 2/29/00 2 Report and Recommendation by Mag, Judge Thomas M, Blewitt recommending that the compl be dismissed pursuant to 28 USC Sec 1915A for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, NOTICE; Exceptions to be filed within 10 days. objections to Rand R due 3/17/00 (cc: plf, counsel and Court) (jb) [Entry date 02/29/00] REMARK - File to Hbg to await objs to RR (jb) [Entry date 02/29/00] 2/29/00 3/2/00 REMARK - Case file placed in the Hbg. RR section to await obj. ddls. (am) [Entry date 03/02/00] 3/8/00 3 COUNTY COURT RECORD rec'd from Cumberland County Prothonotary's Office containing all filings in this case. (sc) [Entry date 03/09/00] REMARK - Case file to Judge Caldwell, (am) [Entry date 03/17/00] 3/17/00 4/6/00 4 ORDER by Judge William W, Caldwell Upon consideration of the report of the mag. judge, filed 2/29/00, to which no objs, have been filed, and independent review of the record, IT IS ORDERED THAT: 1) The pltf's 8th amendment claim is dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. 2) The Clerk of Court shall remand this action to the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, PA, for resolution of the remaining state-law claim. 3) The Clerk of Court shall also close this file. [2-1] remanding case to state court (cc: all counsel, Ct" M.J, Blewitt, Security & Cumbo County) (jh) [Entry date 04/07/00] REMARK - Case file placed in closed file room in Hbg. (jh) [Entry date 04/10/00] 4/10/00 Docket as of April 10, 2000 8:49 am Page 2 dlliliiMlllill~ rL=-<,,,"-~1 UBj__~IlIbDmg "'"~~ ~.~ H~. " -~ () ~ -OC::.; mji' ~{: ~~ ~o 5>(, z....:; ...... C, Pc Z =< C) o p.. 'CJ 7,::1 o -n .~ "'1:] -','}~..; ;]~)! ~'~; t) cSrti > :;:;; -< -'" ~ f'.~ .c- "",l ,..~ "T1 [= " ;.II1111i111i1iil1' ,""",_~",_~.'i ~, -., MELVIN LEE, DY-8704, PLAINTIFF V, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA SCI CAMP HILL C,O, J.v, VALENTIN, DEFENDANTS : 00-0571 CIVIL TERM AND NOW, this ORDER OF COURT 2~ k. day of April, 2000, the motion of plaintiff, Melvin Lee, for the appointment of counsel to represent him on this civil damage claim, IS DENIED. Melvin Lee, DY-8704, Pro se SRCF 801 Butler Pike Mercer, PA 16137 ;;::~ ~ - ;..5 -() 0 RK5 Raymond W, Dorian, Esquire Pa, Department of Corrections Office of Chief Counsel 55 Utley Drive Camp Hill, PA 17011 :saa . - , . I.. ~ ~ " DG r,F~ 2 L~ ~:_;. I:' ~ ~ l ; ;:;, r>r~ ..i' r..~v C" i!',(",'" ('JII"rIV vPI,:,~I..., ,,_,.., -.../..,'....'~, I PENI\jSYLVi~NjA - _""",liiIl>'ll(' ~"f,.~lM_~ ~...,.._ " ~ "", "'7,.1 I. 1IBI.i.-~, -, << IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Melvin Lee, Plaintiff Docket No. 2000-571 vs. SCI-Camp Hill, COJV Valentin, Defendants MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL TO: THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT: AND NOW, to wit this 20th day of April 2000 comes.petitioner, pro-se, and petitions this Court to appoint counsel unto him pursuant to Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure; petitioner assigns the following therefore: 1. That petitioner is incarcerated at the State Regional Cor- rectional Facility at Mer~~r, Pennsylvania. 2. Petitioner is in need of counsel to help prepare the case that petitioner is now filing. 3. Petitioner has filed with this Honorable Court an application to proceed in forma pauperis and proceed as an indigent party. 4. Petitioner is unable to obtain private counsel because of his being indigent. 5. The plaintiff has a limited knowledge of the law. 6. This case has been remanded to the Court of Common Pleas by the Honorable U.S. District Judge, William W. Caldwell, of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania pursuant to 'Order' given and filed on April 6, 2000. (see attached) Date: April 20, 2000 Respectfully, ~~~. M lvin Lee DY-8704 801 Butler Pike Mercer, PA 16137 , - JJ 0 ~-.ll~!~, , Color Of State Law: Misuse of power possessed by virtue of state law and made possible only because the wrong doer is clothed with the authority of state law, is action taken under color of state law. See Monroe-Pape, 365 U. S. at 184, Quoting U. S.-Classic, 313 U.S. 325, 326 (1941). West-Atkins, 487 U.S. at 50. Brown-Miller, 631 F2d 408, 411 (5th cir. 1980) AFFIDAVITT 1. Plaintiff's ability to investigate the facts, documentary discovery, depositions by prison officials or access to witnessl~s. Is largely hindered by plaintiffs incarceration. See-Tabron-Gra(~ 6 F3d at 156 (Holding that need for discovery supports appointm'mt of counsel, Tucker-randall, 948 F.2d. 388, 391-92 7th cire. 1991 (Noting that prisoner could not effectively investigate case arising at a jail from which he had been transferred. 2. Plaintiff alleges there will be need for cross examination which will be important. Plaintiff expects the facts to be strongly disputed. See Tabron-Grace 6F3d at 156, Gaston-Coughlin, 679 F. Supp. at 273 (Credibility issues supported appointment of counsel). 3. Plaintiff's inability to present the case. Whisenant-Yuan, 739 F.2d at 163 (Counsel should have been appointed for inmate with little general eduearion and no legal education). 4. Plaintiff has asked for jury trial. Abdullah-Gunther, 949 F.2d at 1036. 1iiIIllIrIlIIIl" ~ ,/, ;.: .J, AD 72A (Rev.8/82) 1~~I_llllWI:iIII~,', IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA MELVIN LEE, plaintiff v>l. CIVIL ACTION NO, 1:CV-QQ-Q326 SCI-CAMP HILL and J. V. VALENTIN, Defendants FILED HARRISBURG, PA APR 6 2000 o R D E R THE BACKGROUND OF THIS ORDER IS AS FOLLOWS :''" ., 'f C. D'ANDREA, CL Deputy Oler!, The pro se plaintiff, Melvin Lee, currently incarcerated at SCI-Mercer, Pennsylvania, but formerly imprisoned at SCl-Camp Hill, Pennsylvania, filed this action in state court, alleging both eighth amendment and state-law claims. (Complaint, Si V.A) . The plaintiff avers that defendant, J,V. Valentin, a guard at Camp Hill, shut a cell' door on the plaintiff's hand, causing permanent injury to one finger. The defendants removed the action here on the basis of federal jurisdiction. We are considering the report and recommendation of the magistrate judge. The magistrate judge conducted a sua sponte review of the complaint under 28 U.S.C. Si 1915A and concluded that the averments of the complaint did not rise to the level of an eight amendment claim. He recommended that the complaint be '. _I k~Wllll<tJ1!1~'^ 4..~!1'" l' t dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. The plaintiff filed no objections to the report. We will accept the recommendation that the complaint sets forth no eighth amendment claim. However, we cannot accept the recommendation that the complaint be dismissed. Since the complaint still sets forth a seemingly valid state-law claim, we will instead remand the action to state court for resolution of the state-law claim. See Carneqie-Mellon University v. Cohill, 484 V.S. 343, 108 S.Ct. 614, 98 L.Ed.2d 720 (1988). Accordingly, this 6th April, 2000, upon consideration of the report of the magistrate judge, filed February 29, 2000, to ) which no objections have been filed, and independent review of the record, it is ordered that: 1. The plaintiff's eighth amendment claim is dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. 2. The Clerk of Court shall remand this action to the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, for resolution of the remaining state-law claim, 3. The Clerk of Court shall also close this file. (t.1{/4UJfV' William W. Ca United States Judge 2 AO 72A (Rev,8/82) .. ,..~...~ ..",-- ? ".- ~-.."..~~ -I $ .. '" c . o ... 't ;~-7,.'~'~ \....' ~ ~ "-...\. ~~ ~~& ~ ~ ~ ~ ,. . '"'C o;L" .....1 . _~;i ,,,,.., Office of Attorney General Torts Litigation Section 15th Floor, Strawberry Square Harrisburg, PA 17120 Steven C, Gould Deputy Attorney General Direct Dial 717-783-8035 MELVIN LEE, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA Plaintiff v. : CNIL ACTION - LAW SCI CAMP HILL C.O, J,V. VALENTIN, Defendants : NO, 00-00571 CNIL TERM ENTRY OF APPEARANCE Please enter my appearance on behalf of the Commonwealth Defendant in the above- captioned action, Respectfully submitted, D. MICHAEL FISHER Attorney General By: STEVEN C, GOULD Deputy Attorney General ID #80156 Torts Litigation Section 15th Floor, Strawberry Square Harrisburg, PA 17120 717-783-8035 - Direct Dial DATED: JULy 19,2000 ~~ i'i~~,!; - CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I am this day serving the foregoing ENTRY OF APPEARANCE document upon the person(s) and in the manner indicated below: SERVICE BY FIRST CLASS MAIL POSTAGE PREPAID ADDRESSED AS FOLLOWS: MELVIN LEE, #DY-8704 SRCF 801 BUTLER PIKE MERCER, PA 16137 (pro Se) .~ STEVEN C. GOULD. ill #80156 Deputy Attorney General By: Torts Litigation Section 15th Floor, Strawberry Square Harrisburg, PA 17120 717-783-8035 - Direct Dial DATED: JULY 19,2000 ~" ",,: I ,,' ,., r'" ", ... . , . .;="'~- - . ~: j; , , . , , "~""."",,,,'~b,",""" o ~~ <- ~~~. ;~ 0:~;;.c r;':L.} ~t3 ;;o-c; -" ~ ~.::) c;:; . ,'"" '. "..' " - ~' ~:? l~:;"':;' ."D ~,,'-," ,.' ~ :J1 . ., , .1- ....1IiIi~ , Office of Attorney General Torts Litigation Section 15th Floor, Strawberry Square Harrisburg, PA 17120 Steven C, Gould Deputy Attorney General Direct Dial 717-783-8035 MELVIN LEE, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA Plaintiff v, : CIVIL ACTION - LAW SCI CAMP HILL C,O. lV, VALENTIN, Defendants : NO, 00-00571 CIVIL TERM NOTICE TO PLEAD TO ALL PARTIES: YOU ARE HEREBY REQUIRED to respond to the within New Matter within twenty (20) days of the date of service hereof or a default judgment may be entered against you, RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: D, MICHAEL FISHER Attorney General BY: ~~ STEVEN C. GOULD, #80156 Deputy Attorney General DATED: August 23, 2000 :-<1-. 'c"". .' ,'"-'--,",,," " ;'>t..:..; I -""'I Office of Attorney General Torts Litigation Section 15th Floor, Strawberry Square Harrisburg, P A 17120 Steven C. Gould Deputy Attorney General Direct Dial 717-783-8035 MELVIN LEE, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA Plaintiff v. : CML ACTION - LAW SCI CAMP HILL C,O. J,V, VALENTIN, Defendants : NO. 00-00571 CML TERM COMMONWEALTH DEFENDANT'S ANSWER AND NEW MATTER TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT AND NOW comes the Defendants, State Correctional Institution at Camp Hill and C,O, Valentin, (hereinafter, "Commonwealth Defendants"), by and through the Office of Attorney General, and files the following Answer and New Matter to Plaintiffs Complaint: I. JURISDICTION 1. DENIED. The allegations set forth in paragraph I of Plaintiffs Complaint constitute conclusions oflaw to which no responsive pleading is required pursuant to the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. II. PARTIES 2. ADMITTED, 3. DENIED as stated. On the contrary, SCI-Camp Hill is not a state government entity, but rather a correctional institution under the control of the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, which is a Commonwealth entity. . '-<_L"- - '-'. -~~- "d" 1- ~-i i 4, ADMITTED in part; DENIED in part. It is ADMITTED only that Corrections Officer Jack Valentin is employed by the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections at SCI-Camp Hill. It is specifically DENIED that Corrections Officer Jack Valentin can be sued in his individual capacity, To the contrary, the Commonwealth Defendants affirmatively states, that Corrections Officer Jack Valentin is a "Commonwealth Party" within the definition of that term at section 8501 of the Judicial Code, 42 Pa,C,S, S 8501. A Commonwealth Party can only be sued for acts arising within the scope of her employment as a Commonwealth' Party pursuant to sections 8501 et seq, ofthe Judicial Code, 42 Pa.C.S. S 8501 et seq.. ill. STATEMENT OF FACTS 5, ADMITTED in part; DENIED in part, It is ADMITTED only that on August 21,1999, the Plaintiff was in his cell at SCI-Camp Hill. It is DENIED that he was standing at his door. After reasonable investigation, the Commonwealth Defendants are without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining averments in paragraph 5, and therefore, said averments are specifically denied, Strict proof of same is 6, DENIED. It is DENIED that the door was suddenly slammed shut by C,O, i I I I ~ demanded at the time of trial. Valentin. On the contrary, in order to ensure that all cell doors are locked in accordance with institutional policy, C.O. Valentin closed the Plaintiff's cell door. After reasonable investigation, the Commonwealth Defendants are without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining averments in paragraph 6, and therefore, said averments are specifically denied, Strict proof of same is demanded at the time of trial. 7, ADMITTED in part; DENIED in part, It is ADMITTED only that Plaintiff complained that his fmger was damaged, It if further admitted that C,O, Valentin after looking at '1' 1- Plaintiff s fmger asked Plaintiff if he wanted to go to the Dispensary, It is DENIED that Plaintiff yelled in pain as C,O, Valentin walked away, By way of further answer, the Commonwealth Defendants affirmatively states, that after C,O. Valentin completed shutting the cell doors in accordance with institutional policy, he returned to Plaintiffs cell unaware that Plaintiffs finger was injured or that Plaintiff was complaining of pain, 8, DENIED, After reasonable investigation, the Commonwealth Defendants are without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of these averments, and therefore, said averments are specifically denied, Strict proof of same is demanded at the time of trial. 9, ADMITTED in part; DENIED in part, It is ADMITTED that the Plaintiff received a pass to go to the dispensary, It is specifically DENIED that Plaintiff waited 20 minutes before being issued a pass to the dispensary, To the contrary, Commonwealth Defendants affirmatively states, that Plaintiff was issued a pass within 5-10 minutes and before mainline returned, 10. DENIED, After reasonable investigation, the Commonwealth Defendants are without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of these averments, and therefore, said averments are specifically denied. Strict proof of same is demanded at the time of trial. 11, DENIED. After reasonable investigation, the Commonwealth Defendants are without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of these averments, and therefore, said averments are specifically denied, Strict proof of same is demanded at the time of trial. 12, DENIED, After reasonable investigation, the Commonwealth Defendants are ~"'I J I :1 I I' ., '-l-"i".i.ld.J; ~'_,_ 1- ;.:...I.'-M; without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of these averments , and therefore, said averments are specifically denied, Strict proof of same is demanded at the time of trial. 13, DENIED, After reasonable investigation, the Commonwealth Defendants are without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of these averments, and therefore, said averments are specifically denied, Strict proof of same is demanded at the time of trial. 14, DENIED. After reasonable investigation, the Commonwealth Defendants are without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of these averments, and therefore, said averments are specifically denied. Strict proof of same is demanded at the time of trial. 15. DENIED. After reasonable investigation, the Commonwealth Defendants are without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of these averments, and therefore, said averments are specifically denied. Strict proof of same is demanded at the time of trial. 16, DENIED. After reasonable investigation, the Commonwealth Defendants are without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of these averments, and therefore, said averments are specifically denied. Strict proof of same is demanded at the time of trial. 17, DENIED, After reasonable investigation, the Commonwealth Defendants are without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of these averments, and therefore, said averments are specifically denied, Strict proof of same is demanded at the time of trial. ~ "~ - - j-., " -n" i- !b~ 18, DENIED, After reasonable investigation, the Commonwealth Defendants are without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of these averments, and therefore, said averments are specifically denied, Strict proof of same is demanded at the time of trial. IV. CLAIMS OF RELffiF 19, DENIED. The allegations set forth in paragraph 19 of Plaintiffs Complaint constitute conclusions oflaw to which no responsive pleading is required pursuant to the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure, 20, DENIED. The allegations set forth in paragraph 20 of Plaintiffs Complaint constitute conclusions oflaw to which no responsive pleading is required pursuant to the Peunsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure, By way of further answer, the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania has already dismissed the Plaintiffs Eighth Amendment claims, 21. DENffiD, The allegations set forth in paragraph 21 of Plaintiffs Complaint constitute conclusions oflaw to which no responsive pleading is required pursuant to the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure, To the extent that portions of paragraph 21 could be construed as factual allegations, said allegations are specifically denied, and strict proof thereof is hereby demanded at the time of trial. 22, DENIED. The allegations set forth in paragraph 22 of Plaintiffs Complaint constitute conclusions oflaw to which no responsive pleading is required pursuant to the Peunsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure, To the extent that portions of paragraph 22 could be construed as factual allegations, said allegations are specifically denied, and strict proof thereof is hereby demanded at the time of trial. By way of further answer, it is specifically denied that the ",--~_. I . ,,~ ~ I- ~",!2' Commonwealth Defendant, C.O, Valentin breached a duty owed to Plaintiff or that he failed to exhibit caution when closing Plaintiffs cell door. By way of further answer, it is specifically denied that the Commonwealth Defendant, C.O. Valentin's conduct was reckless or in any manner caused the alleged accident or injuries to Plaintiff, By way of further answer, the Commonwealth Defendants affirmatively state that Defendant C,O, Valentin acted prudently and carefully at all time relevant hereto, 23. DENIED. It is specifically denied that the Department of Corrections failed to adequately train personnel in exercising and carrying out his/her duties, By way a further answer, the Commonwealth Defendants affirmatively state that the Department of Corrections properly and adequately trained C.O. Valentin, 24. DENIED. The allegations set forth in paragraph 24 of Plaintiffs Complaint constitute conclusions oflaw to which no responsive pleading is required pursuant to the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. To the extent that portions of paragraph 24 could be construed as factual allegations, said allegations are specifically denied, and strict proof thereof is hereby demanded at the time of trial. By way of further answer, it is specifically denied that the Commonwealth Defendant, C.O. Valentin was negligent when closing Plaintiffs cell door, By way of further answer, it is specifically denied that the Commonwealth Defendant, C,O, Valentin's conduct was "malicious and sadistic disregard and intentional infliction of pain and suffering". Furthermore, it is specifically denied that the Commonwealth Defendant, C.O, Valentin's conduct caused the alleged accident or injuries to Plaintiff, By way of further answer, the Commonwealth Defendants affirmatively state that Defendant C,O, Valentin acted prudently and carefully at all time relevant hereto. By way of further answer, the Commonwealth Defendants aver that any damages or ;'_~ I ' --"0 ~ -, -,,:--- ..:1;.;......:.:. ~ 'j injuries incurred by the Plaintiff were caused by his own contributory and/or comparative negligence, By way of further answer, the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania has already dismissed the Plaintiff's Eighth Amendment claims, WHEREFORE, the Defendants, State Correctional Institution at Camp Hill and C,O, Valentin requests that Plaintiff's Complaint be dismissed and that judgment be entered in their favor and against the Plaintiff. NEW MATTER 25, The present action is controlled by the provisions of 1 Pa. C.S. ~23l 0 and Act No. 1980-142, set forth in 42 Pa. C,S, ~~850l, et seq., which Acts are incorporated herein and pled by reference, The Commonwealth Defendants assert all the defenses contained therein. 26, The Commonwealth Defendants are immune from suit pursuant to 1 Pa. C.S, ~231O, and this action is not within any of the exceptions to immunity as set forth in 42 Pa, C,S, ~8522, and therefore this action is barred, 27. Should liability be found on the part ofthe Commonwealth Defendants, the amounts and types of damages recoverable in the present action are limited and controlled by 42 Pa, C,S, ~8528, 28, The Judicial Code at 42 Pa, C.S. ~5522(a), which section is incorporated herein and pled by reference, provides that the Commonwealth and the Attorney General must have received written notice of intent to sue within six (6) months from the date the cause of action accrues. In the absence of such notice, this action is barred, ~ ; -- -.\ 1_- -~ 29. The alleged conduct of the Commonwealth Defendants, standing alone, did not cause the Plaintiffs harm; therefore, the Commonwealth Defendants cannot be held liable for the Plaintiffs alleged injuries and/or damages, 30. Ifthe accident occurred as alleged, then the conduct complained of did not cause the accident or the injuries complained of, 31, The Commonwealth Defendants aver that if negligence is found to exist on their part, said negligence was not the proximate cause of Plaintiffs injuries, 32, If the accident occurred as alleged, then the conduct complained of did not create a reasonably foreseeable risk of the accident or the injuries complained of, 33. The Commonwealth Defendants are absolved from liability because any negligence alleged on his part merely facilitated the Plaintiffs injuries and/or damages, 34. The Plaintiff was contributorily negligent and/or failed to mitigate his claimed damages, thereby limiting and/or barring any recovery, 35, Commonwealth Defendant, C,O, Valentin, at all times relevant hereto was an employee of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Corrections, and acting within the course and scope of his employment. 36. Commonwealth employees acting within the scope of their duties, are "Commonwealth party" as defined by 42 Pa. C,S. g8501. 37, The Commonwealth parties are specifically entitled to the defenses set forth in 42 Pa. C.S.A. g8524, which section is incorporated herein and pled by reference, 38. The Commonwealth Defendants invoke any and all common law defenses available to them pursuant to 42 Pa, C,S, g8524, 39, The Commonwealth parties are immune from claims alleging intentional tort, ~ "C I- _..IIM-i 40. At all times material hereto, Commonwealth Defendant, C,O, Valentin, was assigned as a block officer on the Plaintiffs block at SCI-Camp Hill. 41. On August 21, 1999, in order to ensure that all cell doors were locked in accordance with institutional policy, Commonwealth Defendant, C,O. Valentin, pushed the Plaintiff s cell door closed, 42. After Commonwealth Defendant, C,O, Valentin completed shutting the cell doors for the cell block, in accordance with institutional policy, he returned to Plaintiffs cell unaware that Plaintiff s finger was injured or that Plaintiff was complaining of pain, 43. After being informed by Plaintiffthat his hand was hurt, Commonwealth Defendant C.O, Valentin, immediately inquired whether Plaintiff wanted to go to the dispensary, to which, Plaintiff replied yes, 44. At all times material hereto, Plaintiff refused to answer any of Commonwealth Defendant, C,O. Valentin's questions concerning how he injured his hand, 45. . The Commonwealth Defendant, C.O. Valentin, acted at all times within the scope of his authority and without any actual or imputed knowledge that his actions violated any ofthe Plaintiffs constitutional rights and, therefore, is immune from suit. 46. The Commonwealth Defendants at all times were acting in reliance upon valid federal and state laws and regulations, 47, Whatever injuries or damages were sustained by the Plaintiff, as alleged, were caused in whole or in part or were contributed to by reasons of the negligent or intentional conduct of the Plaintiff, 48. The acts or omissions of the Commonwealth Defendants which were alleged to constitute negligent or more culpable conduct were not substantial causes or factors in the =, .l-., - ..J injuries sustained by the Plaintiff. 49. Any and all damages or injuries sustained by Plaintiff resulted not from the conduct or acts of the Commonwealth Defendants, but from the conduct or acts of the Plaintiff, 50. Whatever actions may have been taken by the Commonwealth Defendants that caused loss to Plaintiff were justified, 51, The Commonwealth Defendants' conduct was neither negligent nor more culpable. 52. The Commonwealth Defendants lacks personal or direct involvement in any of the alleged violations ofthe Plaintiffs rights, 53. The Commonwealth Defendants are entitled to official immunity from the Plaintiffs claims, 54, At all times relevant hereto any actions or inactions of the Commonwealth Defendants were done within the scope of their authority in good faith and without malice, 55. The Commonwealth Defendants are entitled to objective good faith immunity from the Plaintiffs claim and have not violated any rights and/or clearly established rights of the Plaintiff, 56. The Plaintiff consented to any actions or inactions committed by the Commonwealth Defendants and therefore, the Plaintiffs claims are barred against the Commonwealth Defendants, 57, Any actions or inactions committed by the Commonwealth Defendants were done pursuant to duties required by statute, regulation or directive and therefore, the Commonwealth Defendants are immune. 58, Any actions or inactions committed by the Commonwealth Defendants were -'J_" -"- ., -", &- J~ . . ~i' matters within the discretion granted to the Commonwealth Defendants by statute, regulation or directive and therefore the Commonwealth Defendants are immune, 59. The Plaintiff was contributorily negligent and/or the negligence of the Plaintiff exceeded that ofthe Commonwealth Defendants, if any, 60. Liability on the part of the Commonwealth Defendants are specifically denied, 61. The Commonwealth Defendants are immune from claims grounded upon negligent supervision or employment. 62, Plaintiff knowing and conscious assumption of the risk led to the alleged resulting injuries and is a bar to recovery, 63, The causal negligence of the Plaintiff is greater than any negligence on the part of the Commonwealth Defendants, and Plaintiff's recovery is therefore barred, or, in the alternative, must be diminished in accordance with the Pennsylvania Comparative Negligence Act. 64. Punitive damages are not recoverable against the Commonwealth Defendants, WHEREFORE, the Commonwealth Defendants respectfully request that the Plaintiff's Complaint be dismissed and judgment be entered in their favor and against the Plaintiff. D, MICHAEL FISHER Attorney General By: ~~ . STEVEN C. GOULD ID #80156 Deputy Attorney General DATED: AUGUST 23, 2000 " " I. ...............i.l<w_- VERIFICATION I, .:.\~" \)(>..'\er-.\..", . verifY that the foregoing statements are true and correct to the best of my information, knowledge and belief, aud!ll'e made subject to the penalties of 18 Fa. C.S, ~4904 relating to unSWOrn falsification to authorities, -' ---, .', ." - ,-~ .~ L, ..,.~ :; CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I am this day serving the foregoing ANSWER AND NEW MATTER upon the person(s) and in the manner indicated below: SERVICE BY FIRST CLASS MAIL POSTAGE PREPAID ADDRESSED AS FOLLOWS: MELVIN LEE, #DY-8704 SRCF 801 BUTLER PIKE MERCER, PA 16137 (Pro Se) By: STEVEN C, GOULD Deputy Attorney General ID #80156 Torts Litigation Section 15th Floor, Strawberry Square Harrisburg, PA 17120 717-783-8035 - Direct Dial DATED: AUGUST 23, 2000 I"""~' ... . ,.,' -~ -, -I... 1Ml- ; '-~' ~ '- ~ ' "~" "",," --- ~, .._I -", '.' "^""'"""""' o c ;?'~ -0,,,'.,. ~'~~:i z:,C' .~ ::.1 -< (:", () :~, -:r::-~ ::;) r<\ C.1"' " U) . -, Jl))