eLaws | Code of Federal Regulations | United States Code |
 All Courts
 Federal Courts
 US Court of Appeals Cases
 Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
 2005-07

Flowers v. Lebanon Cty Prison , 138 F. App'x 435 ( 2005 )


Menu:
 
  •                                                                                                                            Opinions of the United
2005 Decisions                                                                                                             States Court of Appeals
for the Third Circuit
7-6-2005
Flowers v. Lebanon Cty Prison
Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential
Docket No. 03-3039
Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2005
Recommended Citation
"Flowers v. Lebanon Cty Prison" (2005). 2005 Decisions. Paper 898.
http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2005/898
This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova
University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2005 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova
University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.
APS-157                                                      NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
NO. 03-3039
________________
FRANK FLOWERS, JR.,
Appellant
V.
LEBANON COUNTY PRISON; CHAD
EBERSOLE; JOHN RUSSELL;
CHARLES D. JONES
____________________________________
On Appeal From the United States District Court
For the Middle District of Pennsylvania
(D.C. Civ. No. 02-cv-00136)
District Judge: Honorable James M. Munley
_______________________________________
Submitted For Possible Dismissal Under
    28 U.S.C. § 1915
    (e)(2)(B) and
Possible Summary Action Under Third Circuit LAR 27.4 and I.O.P. 10.6
Before: SLOVITER, ROTH, AND AMBRO Circuit Judges.
(Filed July 6, 2005)
_______________________
OPINION
_______________________
PER CURIAM
Frank Flowers, Jr. appeals from the dismissal of his complaint by the District
Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania.
In 2002, while an inmate at Lebanon County Prison (“LCP”), Flowers filed a civil
rights complaint raising various allegations regarding his treatment by the LCP officials
and his public defender. LCP and the public defender filed a motion to dismiss for failure
to state a claim. The District Court granted the motion and denied Flowers’ motion for
reconsideration. Flowers filed a timely notice of appeal. The Court issued an order to
show cause why the matter should not be summarily remanded to the District Court for
the District Court to grant Flowers leave to amend his complaint.
As it stands, Flowers’ complaint clearly fails to state a claim upon which relief can
be granted, essentially for the reasons stated by the District Court. See Curtis v. Everette,
    489 F.2d 516
    , 521 (3d Cir. 1973); Patton v. Przybylski,
    822 F.2d 697
    , 700 (7 th Cir. 1987);
Edwards v. Balisok,
    520 U.S. 641
    , 643 (1997). However, the District Court did not give
Flowers an opportunity to amend his complaint, or otherwise determine that any
amendment would be inequitable or futile. See Alston v. Parker,
    363 F.3d 229
    , 235 (3d
Cir. 2004); Grayson v. Mayview State Hosp.,
    293 F.3d 103
    , 108 (3d Cir.2002). Without
expressing any opinion as to the ultimate merits of any possible amendment, we do not
find that an amendment would be inequitable or futile. Accordingly, we will not dismiss
this appeal as frivolous under
    28 U.S.C. § 1915
    (e), and we will summarily remand the
matter to the District Court with instructions to grant Flowers leave to amend his
complaint.
2