Phillips et al v. Pike County Jail Administration et al (INMATE2)

Filing 5

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 1 Inmate 1983 Complaint filed by Kelly O. Phillips, it is further the Recommendation of the Mag Judge that Plaintiff's claims against the Pike Co Jail Admin and the Pike Co Sheriff's Dept be dimissed with pre judice prior to service of process pursuant to the provisions of 28 USC 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), and that these parties be dismissed as defendants to this complaint; Objections to R&R due by 4/3/2006. Signed by Judge Charles S. Coody on 3/20/06. (vma, ) Modified on 3/20/2006 - to show Report and Recommendations is filed on behalf of Kelly O. Phillips(vma, ).

Phillips et al v. Pike County Jail Administration et al (INMATE2)

Doc. 5

Case 2:06-cv-00208-MEF-SRW

Document 5

Filed 03/20/2006

Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA N O R T H E R N DIVISION _______________________________ K E L L Y PHILLIPS P l a in tif f , v. P IK E COUNTY JAIL ADMINISTRATION, e t al., D e f e n d a n ts . _______________________________ * * * * * 2:06-CV-208-MEF (WO)

R E C O M M E N D A T I O N OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE P l a i n t if f is an inmate incarcerated at the Pike County Jail. He brings this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that the conditions of confinement at the jail are unconstitutional. Plaintiff names as Defendants the Pike County Jail Administration, the Pike County Sheriff's D e p a rtm e n t, Mrs. Olivia, Captain Doug Wheeler, and Sheriff Russell Thomas. Upon review o f the complaint, the court concludes that dismissal of Plaintiff's claims against the Pike C o u n ty Jail Administration and the Pike County Sheriff's Department prior to service of p roc ess is appropriate under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). D IS C U S S IO N Neither the Pike County Jail Administration nor the Pike County Sheriff's Department a re legal entities and, therefore, they are not subject to suit or liability under § 1983. See D e a n v. Barber, 951 F.2d 1210, 1214 (11 th Cir. 1992). In light of the foregoing, the court

Dockets.Justia.com

Case 2:06-cv-00208-MEF-SRW

Document 5

Filed 03/20/2006

Page 2 of 3

c o n c lu d e s that Plaintiff's claims against these defendants are due to be dismissed. Id. CONCLUSION A c c o rd in g ly, it is the RECOMMENDATION of the Magistrate Judge that Plaintiff's c la im s against the Pike County Jail Administration and the Pike County Sheriff's Department b e DISMISSED with prejudice prior to service of process pursuant to the provisions of 28 U .S .C . § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), and that these parties be DISMISSED as defendants to this c o m p lain t. It is further the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge that this case with r e s p e c t to the remaining defendants be referred back to the undersigned for additional p ro c e e d in g s . It is further O R D E R E D that the parties are DIRECTED to file any objections to the said R e c o m m e n d a tio n on or before April 3, 2006. Any objections filed must specifically identify th e findings in the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation objected to. Frivolous, conclusive o r general objections will not be considered by the District Court. The parties are advised th a t this Recommendation is not a final order of the court and, therefore, it is not appealable. F a ilu re to file written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations in the M a g i s tr a t e Judge's report shall bar the party from a de novo determination by the District C o u rt of issues covered in the report and shall bar the party from attacking on appeal factual f in d in g s in the report accepted or adopted by the District Court except upon grounds of plain e rr o r or manifest injustice. Nettles v. Wainwright, 677 F.2d 404 (5 th Cir. 1982). See Stein

2

Case 2:06-cv-00208-MEF-SRW

Document 5

Filed 03/20/2006

Page 3 of 3

v . Reynolds Securities, Inc., 667 F.2d 33 (11 th Cir. 1982). See also Bonner v. City of P r ic h a r d , 661 F.2d 1206 (11 th Cir. 1981, en banc), adopting as binding precedent all of the d e c is io n s of the former Fifth Circuit handed down prior to the close of business on S e p te m b e r 30, 1981. D o n e this 20th day of March, 2006.

/s/Charles S. Coody CHARLES S. COODY C H IE F UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

3