Sparks v. Cross County Jail et al

Filing 24

ORDER granting 16 motion for copies; directing the Clerk to send Plaintiff a copy of docket entry 9 along with a copy of this Order; denying without prejudice 19 motion to amend. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jerome T. Kearney on 7/9/2024. (jak)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS NORTHERN DIVISION LEONARD ELLIS SPARKS, v. PLAINTIFF 3:24CV00053-DPM-JTK CROSS COUNTY JAIL, et al. DEFENDANTS ORDER Leonard Ellis Sparks (“Plaintiff”) has filed a Motion for Copies and a Motion to Amend Amended Complaint. (Doc. Nos. 16, 19). Plaintiff’s Motion for Copies (Doc. No. 16) is GRANTED. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send Plaintiff a copy of docket entry no. 9 along with a copy of this Order. Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend (Doc. No. 19) is DENIED without prejudice. Plaintiff wants to add a claim and a defendant through a supplement to his Amended Complaint. (Id.). “Liability under § 1983 requires a causal link to, and direct responsibility for, the alleged deprivation of rights.” Madewell v. Roberts, 909 F.2d 1203, 1208 (8th Cir. 1990). “Because vicarious liability is inapplicable to . . . § 1983 suits, a plaintiff must plead that each Governmentofficial defendant, through the official’s own individual actions, has violated the Constitution.” Parrish v. Ball, 594 F.3d 993, 1001 (8th Cir. 2010) (citing Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 676 (2009)). Plaintiff asks to add L.N. Hagler as a defendant to this action. (Doc. No. 19). In his Motion, Plaintiff described unlawful actions in terms of “they” or “her” after referencing several individuals. As such, it is not clear what L.N. Hagler allegedly did to violate Plaintiff’s rights. It is not possible to determine the actions of the other individuals for that same reason. In short, allowing Plaintiff to supplement his Amended Complaint with the allegations in his Motion would be futile. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend is denied without prejudice. Wagstaff & Cartmell, LLP v. Lewis, 40 F.4th 830, 841 (8th Cir. 2022) (recognizing futility as a ground for denying motion to amend). IT IS SO ORDERED this 9th day of July, 2024. ____________________________________ JEROME T. KEARNEY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 2

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?