REYNOLDS v. LEFFLER et al

1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
TERRE HAUTE DIVISION
ANGELO REYNOLDS, 	)
)
Plaintiff, 	)
)
v. 	) 	No. 2:25-cv-00482-JPH-MKK
)
TIMOTHY LEFFLER, 	)
JOHN WOLFE, 	)
JOHN FIELDS, 	)
JOHN BEDWELL, 	)
JOHN BRADLEY, 	)
JOHN EDWARDS, 	)
JOHN ADAMS, 	)
JOHN NEFF, 	)
JANE ELKINS, 	)
ASHLEY MOSELEY, 	)
JOHN PAYNE, 	)
JOHN SIMMERMAN, 	)
MADISON PASSMORE, 	)
)
Defendants. 	)
ORDER SCREENING COMPLAINT AND DIRECTING FURTHER
PROCEEDINGS
Plaintiff Angelo Reynolds is a prisoner currently incarcerated at Wabash
Valley Correctional Facility ("Wabash Valley"). On July 29, 2025, the Court
screened Mr. Reynolds's original complaint and determined it contained two
distinct and misjoined claims: (1) that he was deprived of any running water at
all, for drinking and religious purposes, for 10 days; and (2) that after the water
was restored, it was and still is foul and makes him ill when he drinks it, and
that this is a widespread problem in the Wabash Valley Secure Confinement
Unit. Dkt. 3. The Court allowed the ongoing water problem claim to proceed
under 	original 	cause 	number 	2:24-cv-00527-MPB-MJD, 	and 	directed 	Mr.
Case 2:25-cv-00482-JPH-MKK Document 7 Filed 01/13/26 Page 1 of 6 PageID #:
<pageID>

2
Reynolds to inform the Court whether he wished to sever the short-term water
deprivation claims into a new action. Id. On September 26, 2025, the Court
opened this action after Mr. Reynolds moved to proceed with the short-term
water claims. Id. The Court now proceeds to screen Mr. Reynolds's complaint, as
related to the short-term deprivation of water, as required 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a),
(c).
I. Screening Standard
When screening a complaint, the Court must dismiss any portion that is
frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim for relief, or seeks monetary relief
against a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). To
determine whether the complaint states a claim, the Court applies the same
standard as when addressing a motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 12(b)(6). See Schillinger v. Kiley, 954 F.3d 990, 993 (7th Cir. 2020).
Under that standard, a complaint must include "enough facts to state a claim to
relief that is plausible on its face." Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570
(2007). "A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content
that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable
for the misconduct alleged." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009). The
Court construes pro se complaints liberally and holds them to a "less stringent
standard than pleadings drafted by lawyers." Cesal v. Moats, 851 F.3d 714, 720
(7th Cir. 2017).
Case 2:25-cv-00482-JPH-MKK Document 7 Filed 01/13/26 Page 2 of 6 PageID #:
<pageID>

3
II. The Complaint
Mr. Reynolds attached 76 pages of exhibits to his complaint. Although the
Court may consider documents attached to a complaint, it is a plaintiff's burden
to plead a short and plain statement of the claim. Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2);
Williamson v. Curran, 714 F.3d 432, 436 (7th Cir. 2013). These exhibits appear
to be evidence in support of the claims alleged in complaint. To consider the
exhibits 	at 	this 	point 	would 	circumvent 	the 	"simple 	and 	plain 	statement
requirement" of Rule 8(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and impose
an unjustified burden on the Court. The Court will not sift through these
documents and try to discern their potential relevance at the pleading stage.
Kadamovas 	v. 	Stevens, 	706 	F.3d 	843, 	844 	(7th 	Cir. 	2013) 	(stating 	that
attachments to a complaint may be stricken).
Mr. Reynolds's factual allegations are accepted as true at the pleading
stage. See Lisby v. Henderson, 74 F.4th 470, 472 (7th Cir. 2023). The complaint
as applied in this action names as defendants: (1) Timothy Leffler, (2) John Wolfe,
(3) John Fields, (4) John Bedwell, (5) John Bradley, (6) John Edwards, (7) John
Adams, (8) John Neff, (9) Jane Elkins, (10) Ashley Moseley, (11) John Payne, (12)
John Simmerman, and (13) Madison Passmore.1
Mr. Reynolds alleges that on September 14, 2024, while confined in the
Secure Control Unit ("SCU") (segregation) at Wabash Valley, the sink in his cell
began spewing sandy, discolored water with black foreign objects in it. Shortly
1 It is unclear that all the defendants named "John" or "Jane" actually have those first
names. Regardless, the Court lists the names as provided by Mr. Reynolds.
Case 2:25-cv-00482-JPH-MKK Document 7 Filed 01/13/26 Page 3 of 6 PageID #:
<pageID>

4
thereafter, 	Mr. 	Reynolds's 	sink 	stopped 	working 	altogether. 	Mr. 	Reynolds
requires water to perform Islamic prayers five times per day.
The sink was inoperative for 10 days. Mr. Reynolds did not receive any
drinking water for the first 5 days, though he was offered juice with breakfast on
a few occasions (not every day). He also was offered coffee every day, which he
doesn't drink. For the last 5 days the water was off, Mr. Reynolds received a total
of 48 ounces of drinking water. During these 10 days, Mr. Reynolds suffered
from dehydration that left him dizzy and weak. He was repeatedly denied water
in order to perform his prayers.
Mr. Reynolds asked defendants Wolfe, Fields, Bedwell, Bradley, Edwards,
Adams, Neff, Elkins, and Zimmerman for water for both drinking and religious
purposes, but they did not obtain it for him. Mr. Reynolds states that "only a few
correctional officers were willing to bring Plaintiff water." Dkt. 1 at 3. Mr.
Reynolds submitted a grievance to Ms. Passmore about the lack of water and
also complained to Lt. Leffler about it. He asked Ms. Moseley to arrange for him
to be moved to a different cell, but she did not respond. He submitted a request
for interview form to Mr. Payne, the head of maintenance at Wabash Valley,
about the lack of water and did not receive a response.
III. Discussion of Claims
Applying 	the 	screening 	standard 	to 	the 	factual 	allegations 	in 	the
complaint, Eighth Amendment conditions of confinement claims shall proceed
against 	all 	Defendants 	based 	on 	the 	allegations 	that 	they 	all 	ignored 	Mr.
Reynolds's need for adequate drinking water over a period of 5 to 10 days. Also,
Case 2:25-cv-00482-JPH-MKK Document 7 Filed 01/13/26 Page 4 of 6 PageID #:
<pageID>

5
First Amendment free exercise of religion claims shall 	proceed against all
Defendants.2
This summary of claims includes all of the viable claims identified by the
Court. 	All 	other 	claims 	have 	been 	dismissed. 	If 	the 	plaintiff 	believes 	that
additional claims were alleged in the complaint, but not identified by the Court,
he shall have through February 9, 2026, in which to file a motion to reconsider
the screening order.
IV. Conclusion and Service of Process
The clerk is directed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3) to issue process
to Defendants Timothy Leffler, John Wolfe, John Fields, John Bedwell, John
Bradley, John Edwards, John Adams, John Neff, Jane Elkins, Ashley Moseley,
John Payne, John Simmerman, and Madison Passmore in the manner specified
by Rule 4(d). Process shall consist of the complaint filed on September 26, 2025,
dkt. [1], applicable forms (Notice of Lawsuit and Request for Waiver of Service of
Summons and Waiver of Service of Summons), and this Order.
The clerk is directed to serve the Indiana Department of Correction
employees electronically.
Nothing in this Order prohibits the filing of a proper motion pursuant to
Rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
SO ORDERED.
2 Mr. Reynolds may not proceed against the Defendants under the Religious Land Use
and Institutionalized Persons Act, because the Act does not authorize any kind of relief
against public employees in their individual capacities. Nelson v. Miller, 570 F.3d 868
(7th Cir. 2009).
Case 2:25-cv-00482-JPH-MKK Document 7 Filed 01/13/26 Page 5 of 6 PageID #:
<pageID>

6
Distribution:
Electronic service to Indiana Department of Correction:
Timothy Leffler
John Wolfe
John Fields
John Bedwell
John Bradley
John Edwards
John Adams
John Neff
Jane Elkins
Ashley Moseley
John Payne
John Simmerman
Madison Passmore
(All at Wabash Valley Correctional Facility)
ANGELO REYNOLDS
228386
WABASH VALLEY - CF
Wabash Valley Correctional Facility
6908 S. Old US Hwy 41
CARLISLE, IN 47838
Date: 1/13/2026
Case 2:25-cv-00482-JPH-MKK Document 7 Filed 01/13/26 Page 6 of 6 PageID #:
<pageID>