Block v. Johnson et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
CENTRAL DIVISION
NORMAN BLOCK 	PLAINTIFF
#102440
v. 	Case No. 4:25-cv-1060-JM
DEREK JOHNSON, #087998,
Officer, Pine Bluff Police Department et al. 	DEFENDANTS
ORDER
On October 16, 2025, the Court granted Block’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis,
screened his complaint, and requested an amended complaint. (Doc. 3). Specifically, the Court
determined that Block had made a plausible excessive force claim but asked him to identify both
(1) who was responsible for the force and (2) the resultant injury. (Id.). Block timely filed an
amended complaint. (Doc. 4). The Court will screen it together with his initial complaint. See 28
U.S.C. § 1915A; 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e).
Having been arrested on April 24, 2025, Block says he was sitting, handcuffed in the back
of a patrol car when Officer Johnson tased him “out of the blue” in his arm, shoulder, and foot
requiring a medical check at an area hospital. (Doc. 4 at 4). Block states that Officers Lowery,
Smith, and Edwards were present and did nothing to intervene or stop Officer Johnson’s
unnecessary force. (Id. at 4–5). Block says that he since has experienced ongoing tingling in his
fingertips and toes. (Id. at 5). Block sues Defendants in their official and individual capacities for
damages. He also asks to be released from prison.
As previously stated, Block’s official capacity claims against all the Defendants are
dismissed. (Doc. 3). “A suit against a government officer in his official capacity is functionally
equivalent to a suit against the employing governmental entity.” Veatch v. Bartels Lutheran Home,
627 F.3d 1254, 1257 (8th Cir. 2010). To establish municipal liability, a plaintiff must prove that a
Case 4:25-cv-01060-JM Document 5 Filed 11/19/25 Page 1 of 2

2
policy, practice, or custom attributable to the municipality caused the constitutional injury. Id. In
neither complaint does Block allege that any policy, practice, or custom was the moving force
behind the alleged violations of his rights. As a result, Block has failed to state official-capacity
claims. Additionally, Block’s request for release is not available under § 1983. The sole remedy
for a prisoner seeking release from prison is to file a federal habeas petition. Prieser v. Rodriquez,
411 U.S. 475, 500 (1973).
Nevertheless, for screening purposes only, Block has stated a plausible individual-capacity
excessive-force claim against Officer Johnson and plausible individual-capacity failure-to-
intervene claims against Officers Lowery, Smith, and Edwards. These lone claims will be served.
The Court directs the Clerk to prepare summonses for Officers Johnson, Smith, Lowery,
and Edwards and deliver the summonses along with a copy of the Complaint (Doc. 2), Amended
Complaint (Doc. 4), the Court’s initial Order (Doc. 3), and this Order to the U.S. Marshal for
service, without requiring prepayment of fees and costs or security. The Defendants may be served
through their employer, the Pine Bluff Police Department, 200 East 8th Ave., Pine Bluff, Arkansas
71601.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 19th day of November, 2025.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case 4:25-cv-01060-JM Document 5 Filed 11/19/25 Page 2 of 2