Fill and Sign the Claims Civil Form

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF       COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI       PLAINTIFF VS. NO.             ,       , AND       CORRECTIONAL OFFICIALS, DEFENDANTS CIVIL RIGHTS COMPLAINT THIS COMPLAINT is filed by       , a prisoner, challenging the conditions of his/her confinement in the Mississippi Department of Corrections'       Correctional Facility at       , Mississippi. PARTIES 1. Plaintiff,       , is a(n)       - Custody adult inmate in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections' (MDOC)       Correctional Facility (       CF) located at       , Mississippi. 2. Defendant       , "       ", is the Superintendent of       CF. 3. Defendant       , "       ", is the Internal Affairs Investigators at       CF. 4.       , "       ", is a Deputy Warden at       CF. 5.       , "       ", is Administrator of the       's Facility at       CF. 6.       , "       ", is a member of the Classification Department at       CF. 7.       , "       ", is a Correctional Officer at       CF. 8.       , "       ", is Case Management Supervisor at       CF. 9.       , "       ", is a Case Manager at       CF. The above named defendants are being sued in their individual and official capacities. JURISDICTION 10. This Court has jurisdiction of this matter pursuant to Section 9 - 7 - 81, Mississippi Code Annotated 1972, as amended, and 42 USC Section 1983 as amended. STATEMENT OF THE FACTS 11. In       of       , the defendant       summoned Inmate       to his/her office and told her (       ) that he/she (       ) had heard an inmate rumor that she (       ) was pregnant, and that plaintiff was the father. 12. Inmate       informed       that she (       ) was not pregnant, and that if she was, plaintiff could not possibly be the father, in that she (       ) had not had any sexual contact with the plaintiff. 13.       continued, to no avail, to encourage Inmate       to say that she (       ) had been sexually involved with the plaintiff. 14.       also called Inmate       to his/her office and tried to get him/her to say that she (       ) had sexual contact with the plaintiff. 15.       called several other female inmates to his/her office and tried to get them to say that they had sexual contact with the plaintiff. 16. The mentioned female inmates informed       that they had no sexual contact with the plaintiff and that they would not lie and say that they had. 17. Shortly after Inmate       had met with       , the defendant       summoned her (       ) to his/her office and escorted her (       ) to the       Clinic for a pregnancy test. 18. After the test was completed,       escorted       to the Defendant       's office. 19. In       's office,       was interrogated by       . 20. Both       and       tried to no avail to encourage       to say that she (       ) had sexual contact with the plaintiff. 21. Later that same week Inmate       's pregnancy test results came back negative. 22. Nonetheless,       requested an internal affairs investigation into the inmate rumors of sexual misconduct by plaintiff. 23. The defendant       conducted the investigation. 24. Inmate       was interviewed by       . 25. At that time       was a       - Custody inmate. 26. Within days after her interview with       ,       was not only advanced to       - Custody, she was also assigned to the       . 27. On or about             ,       , plaintiff was interviewed by       . 28.       asked plaintiff if he had been involved in sexual misconduct with female inmates at the       , and specifically if he (plaintiff) had sexually harassed inmate       . 29. Plaintiff stated to       that he (plaintiff) had not been involved in any form of sexual misconduct. 30.       then asked plaintiff if he (plaintiff) would be willing to take a polygraph examination. 31. Plaintiff informed       , at that time that he (plaintiff) did not desire to take a polygraph examination. 32.       advised plaintiff that he (       ) could not make plaintiff take a polygraph examination. 33. Nonetheless, on             ,       , plaintiff was escorted to the       by       to be transported to the       (       ) located in       , Mississippi for the purpose of taking a polygraph examination. 34. The polygraph examination was scheduled by       . 35. While plaintiff was waiting in the lobby of the       for transport to       ,       came into the lobby. 36. Plaintiff asked       why he/she (       ) was having him (plaintiff) transported for a polygraph examination, when plaintiff had previously informed him/her (       ) he (plaintiff) wished to exercise his right not to take a polygraph examination. 37.       replied that he/she (       ) wanted to make sure that plaintiff had an opportunity to take a polygraph examination, because he/she (       ) did not want plaintiff to later say that he (plaintiff) did not have the opportunity to take the examination. 38. Plaintiff was then transported to       by       and       . 39. He (plaintiff) informed the Polygraph Examiner that he did not wish to take a polygraph examination. 40. The Examiner informed plaintiff that he (plaintiff) takes a polygraph examination. 41. On             ,       , Plaintiff was issued a Rules Violation Report (RVR), which was written by       . 42. In the RVR,       accused Plaintiff of violating a prison rule by the specific act of refusing to take a polygraph examination. 43. The defendant       , after being directly involved in the investigation, and in fact requested it, acted as Rules Violation Classification's Official, and classified the RVR as a serious violation of prison Rules. 44. A - Custody inmates housed at       are allowed       -day family visits with their immediate family members every       months. 45. In             , Plaintiff put in a written request with his son/daughter and his father/mother for             ,       to             ,       . 46. On             ,       , Plaintiff received, from the defendant       confirmation       scheduled family visit in Apartment Number       , on       ,       at       hours,       ,       at       hours. 47. There is a $       per night fee for each Apartment. 48. This $       per night fee is supposed to be used to upgrade the apartments. 49. On             ,       , Plaintiff paid $       for a       - day family visit in Apartment Number       , for             ,       to             ,       . 50. The mentioned family visit confirmation that plaintiff received from       advised the plaintiff to remind his family visitors to bring with them food and anything else that may be necessary during the visit. 51. Plaintiff paid for food and other necessary items for the mentioned       - day family visit. 52. Plaintiff also paid someone to bring his family visitors from       , Mississippi to the       for the family visits. 53. On Friday             ,       , plaintiff's family visitors arrived to       from       and       , Mississippi for the scheduled family visit, and they were told by the defendant       that Plaintiff's family visit was cancelled because plaintiff had been issued an RVR. 54.       called plaintiff and informed him (plaintiff) that his family visitors were here at       for a family visit, but that he called       and he/she said that plaintiff family visit was cancelled due to his receiving an RVR. It is important to note that: 55. On             ,       ,       was issued an RVR; however, he/shes was allowed to have his/her family visit. 56. Plaintiff is a       inmate, and       is a       inmate. 57.       inmates are often given preferential treatment compared to the treatment of       inmates housed at       CF. It is also important to note that: 58.       ,       ,       and       were defendants in a previous Civil Rights Complaint filed in this court by the plaintiff; wherein these defendants were found by this Court to have violated plaintiff's due process rights, and injunctive relief was granted. CLAIM I. 59. Plaintiff claims that the Defendant       has failed to supervise and train his/her subordinates,       ,       and       to follow the Court's Orders, State Laws and       Policies, Rules and Regulations in their dealings with inmates, and as a result       's subordinates named above have violated plaintiff's constitutional rights. CLAIM II. 60. Plaintiff claims that the defendants       's and       's attempts to persuade inmates to make untrue accusations of sexual misconduct against the plaintiff was improper and ill treatment and abuse of plaintiff. CLAIM III. 61. Plaintiff claims that the investigation conducted by       as described herein was improper. That       violated State Law, Court's Orders and       Policies, Rules, and Regulations by having plaintiff issued an RVR written by him/her (       ) for plaintiff's exercising his right not to take a polygraph examination; thus violating plaintiff's constitutional rights. CLAIM IV. 62. Plaintiff claims that the defendant       's request for an internal affairs investigation into inmate gossip was improper. That       violated State Law, Court's Orders, and       Policy, Rules, and Regulations when she acted as RVR Classification Official and classified the mentioned RVR as a serious infraction of Prison Rules; thus violating plaintiff's constitutional rights. CLAIM V. 63. Plaintiff claims that the defendants       ,       and       's actions and/or inactions in canceling plaintiff's family visit due to plaintiff being accused of violating a Prison Rule, without observing the required procedural due process safeguards, denies plaintiff procedural due process in violation State, and Federal Law,       Policy, Rules and Regulations and the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. CLAIM VI. 64. Plaintiff claims that the $       per night fee for       - day family visits at       is being illegally collected by       from plaintiff and other inmates, and it is being misused by       and/or       Prison Officials; thus violating State Law and plaintiff rights. CLAIM VII. 65. Plaintiff claims that       ,       and other Prison Officials acting in concert with them are unlawfully using their power in office to harass and intimidate the plaintiff as retaliation against the plaintiff for having won a Civil Suit against them. CLAIM VIII. 66. Plaintiff claims that under State Law and Prison Regulations, it is the duty of the Superintendent to supervise and train his/her subordinates to follow the Laws, Rules and Regulations as it pertain to their duties as Correctional Officials. CLAIM IX. 67. Plaintiff claims that State Law and Prison Regulation prohibit the ill treatment and abuse of       inmates. CLAIM X. 68. Plaintiff claims that inmates in the       may not be punished except for conduct which violates an existing Prison Rule and regulation. CLAIM XI. 69. Plaintiff claims that there is no State Law,       Policy, Rule or Regulation, which authorize       to Order an Inmate to take a polygraph examination. CLAIM XII. 70. Plaintiff claims that there is no State Law,       Policy, Rule or Regulation which notifies Plaintiff that it is a violation of Prison Rules for him/her to refuse to take a polygraph examination, or that he (plaintiff) will be subjected to punishment if he refuses to submit to a polygraph examination. CLAIM XIII. 71. Plaintiff claims that Court's Orders, State Law, and MDOC Policy, Rules and Regulations require the Rules Violation Classification Official to be impartial with no personal involvement in the incident or interest in the outcome of the disciplinary proceeding. CLAIM XIV. 72. Plaintiff claims that State Law, Court's Orders and MDOC Policy, Rules and Regulations strictly prohibit any form of punishment being administered to       inmates for alleged Prison Rules Violations without first providing the inmate with the required procedural due process rights as set out in Chapter 9 of the MDOC Inmate Handbook Rules and Regulations. CLAIM XV. 73. State and Federal Law prohibit the illegal collection of money from inmates, and the misuse of such money. CLAIM XVI. 74. State Law, Court's Orders and       Policy, Rules and Regulations prohibits retaliation against and harassment of       inmates. CLAIM XVII. 75. Plaintiff claims that the defendants owed him a duty to obey the laws, Rules and Regulations in their dealings with him. CLAIM XVIII. 76. Plaintiff claims that the defendants willfully, want only, recklessly and discriminatorily breached their duties by their actions and/or inactions complained of herein. CLAIM XIX 77. Plaintiff claims that as a direct and proximate result of the defendants unlawful actions and/or inactions herein described, plaintiff has suffered; A. Loss of       - day family visit with immediate family, and fees connected to such visits. B. Extreme mental and emotional anguish as a result of being: 1. deprived of his family visit with his family which he looks forward to every       months; 2. denial of his due process rights; 3. harassment, retaliation and abuse. CLAIM XX. 78. Plaintiff claims that the defendants actions and/or inactions herein described are shocking to the conscious considering the fact that these defendants, before entering upon their duties, have, or should have, taken an oath under State Law to obey, by observing and executing the very Laws, Rule and Regulations that plaintiff contends they have violated. CLAIM XXI. 79. Plaintiff claims that the defendants actions, and/or inactions complained of herein are arbitrary, deliberate, malicious, capricious, retaliatory, and discrimatory. CLAIM XXII. 80. Plaintiff claims that he is entitled to be fully compensated by the defendants for their willful, wanton and reckless actions and/or inactions described herein. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff moves this Honorable Court to grant the following relief: A. That proper process be issued for each Defendant requiring them to answer or to otherwise plead as provided by law; B. Grant a Declaratory Judgment that the actions and/or inactions of the Defendants complained of herein that justifiably violates Plaintiff's rights to due process, equal protection of law, and not to be ill-treated or abused by prison officials; C. Grant injunctive relief which: 1. Enjoin the defendants, their agents, and all other persons in active concert and participation with them from denying plaintiff       - day family visits with - out first providing him with the required procedural due process; 2. Enjoin the defendants, their agents, and all persons in active concert and participation with them from punishing plaintiff for conduct which is not a violation of existing Prison Rules, specifically, refusing to take a polygraph examination. 3. Enjoin the defendants, their agents, and all person in active concert and participation with them from harassing, bothering or molesting plaintiff in the future. 4. Expunge from Plaintiff's Central File and all other records pertaining to the plaintiff any and all documents and data related to the RVR and internal affairs investigation complained of herein. D. Grant compensatory damages in the following amounts: 1. ($       )       Dollars per day for the       - day visit illegally cancelled by the defendants. 2. ($       )       Dollars for fees loss with the illegally cancelled family visit. 3. ($       )       Dollars individually from each defendant for and emotional pain and suffering plaintiff incurred as a result of the defendants actions and/or inactions described herein. E. Grant punitive damages in the sum of ($       )       per defendant for their intentional and particularly outrageous       herein: F. Grant reasonable attorney's fees. G. Grant such other relief (special or general) as it may appear plaintiff is entitled to under the circumstances of this case. Respectfully submitted, _______________________________________       Attorney for       Of Counsel:                         Telephone:       MSB #       Attorney for