Walthall v. Bohannon et al

Filing 5

ORDER directing the Clerk to prepare summons for defts Bohannon, White, Hoffman and Adams. The U.S. Marshal is directed to serve these defts with the summons, complaint, amended complaint, and this Order without prepayment of fees therefor. Walthall's claims against deft Brassell Detention Center are dismissed with prejudice. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 9/19/13. (kpr)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS PINE BLUFF DIVISION JAMES THOMAS WALTHALL, ADC #117156 v. PLAINTIFF No. 5:13-cv-281 DPM-JTR BOHANNON, Clerk/Secretary, Dub Brassell Detention Center; ADAMS, Captain at Detention Center, Dub Brassell Detention Center; WHITE, Corporal - Detention Officer, Dub Brassell Detention Center; HOFFMAN, Officer, Detention Officer/Jailer, Dub Brassell Detention Center; and DUB BRASSELL DETENTION CENTER DEFENDANTS ORDER 1. Walthall has filed this pro se § 1983 action alleging that the defendants violated his constitutional rights while he was in the Brassell Detention Center. Ng. 2 & 4. The Court must screen Walthall's complaint and amended complaint. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. 2. Walthall has stated plausible claims that defendants Bohannon, White, and Hoffman violated his constitutional rights when they failed to provide him with adequate personal hygiene supplies and forced him to sleep on the floor without any bedding in violation of a doctor's order that he -1- receive two mattresses. Similarly, Walthall has stated a plausible claim that defendant Adams learned of the alleged constitutional violations during the grievance process, but failed to take corrective action. Defendants Bohannon, White, Hoffman, and Adams will therefore be served. 3. The Court directs the Clerk to prepare a summons for defendants Bohannon, White, Hoffman, and Adams. The Court directs the U.S. Marshal to serve the summons, complaint, amended complaint, and this Order on them without prepayment of fees and costs or security therefor. If any of the defendants are no longer Brassell Detention Center employees, the individual responding to service must file the unserved defendant's last known private mailing address under seal. 4. Walthall's claims against defendant Brassell Detention Center are dismissed with prejudice because jails and detention centers are not legal entities amenable to suit in a§ 1983 action. Owens v. Scott County Jail,328 F.3d 1026, 1027 (8th Cir. 2003). *** Walthall may proceed with his conditions-of-confinement claim against Bohannon, White, and Hoffman, and his failure-to-supervise claim against -2- Adams. Service is ordered on them. Walthall's claims against defendant Brassell Detention Center are dismissed with prejudice. An in forma pauperis appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). So Ordered. -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?