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

Filing 5

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS that Plaintiff's claims against the Pike County Jail Administration and the Pike County Sheriff's Department be 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 complaint ; Objections to R&R due by 4/3/2006. Signed by Judge Charles S. Coody on 3/20/2006. (ag, )

Download PDF
Richards v. Pike County Jail Administration et al (INMATE2) Doc. 5 Case 2:06-cv-00239-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 _______________________________ A N T H O N Y RICHARDS, SR. 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-239-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-00239-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 id e n tif y the findings in the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation objected to. Frivolous, co n clus ive or general objections will not be considered by the District Court. The parties are a d v is e d that this Recommendation is not a final order of the court and, therefore, it is not a p p e a la b le . F a ilu re to file written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations in the M a g is tra te 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 2 Case 2:06-cv-00239-MEF-SRW Document 5 Filed 03/20/2006 Page 3 of 3 e r r o r or manifest injustice. Nettles v. Wainwright, 677 F.2d 404 (5 th Cir. 1982). See Stein 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

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?