Sign Up for Vincent AI
Jones v. Neb. Dep't of Corr. Servs.
Plaintiff, a patient at the Norfolk Regional Center, has been given leave to proceed in forma pauperis. (Filing 7.) The court now conducts an initial review ofPlaintiff's Complaint to determine whether summary dismissal is appropriate under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).
In a case reminiscent of many he has previously filed1, Plaintiff sues more than 80 Defendants in a 96-page Complaint objecting to his illegal criminal conviction2, his unjustified transfer to the Norfolk Regional Center ("NRC"), and conditions of his confinement at the NRC. Plaintiff describes the basis of his case as this: "an illegal civil commitment growing out of an illegal criminal conviction on August 30, 1996." (Filing 1 at CM/ECF p. 8.) Plaintiff makes the following claims:
(1) The Lancaster County District Court and the Lancaster County Board of Mental Health never acquired jurisdiction over Plaintiff because he was two days short of "completing" his sentence when he was transferred to the NRC, in violation of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 71-1202, and there was no court order mandating his commitment to the NRC. Plaintiff's wrongful commitment to the NRC forces him to "live in fear" of being attacked by "psychotic" fellow patients who are "mentally disturbed and suicidal and psychologically unstable." (Filing 1 at CM/ECF p. 20.)
(2) Many Defendants "failed to train" other Defendants "in this civil conspiracy against Plaintiff."
(3) With regard to his underlying criminal conviction, Plaintiff was subject to a warrantless arrest for first-degree sexual assault; the criminal citation and complaintwas not filed with Lancaster County or the Lancaster County District Court; and the county attorney issued an untimely criminal complaint that was defective on its face because it did not comply with Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-424.
(4) Defendant Kristi Egger, Plaintiff's public defender who represented him before the mental health board, breached her fiduciary duty, duty of loyalty, duty to provide competent service, duty of honesty, duty to act in a timely fashion, and duty to bring to the board's attention the jurisdiction issue.
(5) The NRC has a custom, policy, and practice of treating sex offenders in a way that increases the duration of offenders' confinement and removes privileges if the offenders refuse to participate.
(6) The NRC is violating its own policies because patients are to be considered for transfer to the Lincoln Regional Center if they reach a "Level 3 or 4," and Plaintiff has reached such levels but has not been transferred.
(7) Plaintiff is being denied access to the courts because of the NRC's 12-inch legal paper limit and the lack of a law dictionary, telephone book, Nebraska bar directory, and legal aid or paralegal.
(8) The NRC has a policy of searching patient's cells outside of their presence, including searching through legal documents and personal letters and failing to issue "search forms" after the search is concluded.
(9) The NRC failed to give Plaintiff flyers and a free ink pen that came with a wrist-watch he ordered and forced Plaintiff to surrender his uneaten holiday food items to the local food pantry instead of sending them to family members.
(10) When Plaintiff was accused of rule violations, he did not have the right to address the allegations and evidence against him at a disciplinary hearing, to present witnesses on his behalf, to have legal assistance, to prepare a defense, or to appeal thedecisions of the treatment team. These accusations have caused an increase in the duration of his confinement, affected his "scoring levels," and caused privilege suspension without notice. (Filing 1 at CM/ECF pp. 13 & 18.)
(11) Security specialists or technicians—who monitor Plaintiff's behavior, write reports, and "score" Plaintiff—practice mental-health care without a license in violation of Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 38-2115, 38-2116, and 38-2122 because they do not have advanced educational degrees and have not been certified by the Nebraska Mental Health Practice Board under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 38-2105.
(12) Defendant Whittamore-Mantzios, an attorney allegedly under contract with the Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services ("NDHHS") to assist patients like Plaintiff with legal issues, refused to help Plaintiff with this case.
(13) Two unknown female receptionists forced plaintiff to sign "unknown papers and documents under duress" when he arrived at the NRC. Further, Defendant Cheryl Heimann forced Plaintiff to sign a sex-offender-registration document "against Plaintiff['s] will." (Filing 1 at CM/ECF p. 20.)
(14) Defendant Rosetta McAllister, R.N., gave Plaintiff the wrong medication nine months ago, which caused Plaintiff to experience pain above his heart for two months.
Plaintiff purports to bring claims under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981, 1983, 1985, 1986, 1987, and 1988 for violation of his rights under the United States and Nebraska constitutions, as well as state-law claims for abuse of process, malicious prosecution, false imprisonment, conspiracy, negligent and intentional...
Experience vLex's unparalleled legal AI
Access millions of documents and let Vincent AI power your research, drafting, and document analysis — all in one platform.
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting