BARKER v. BAY COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE et al
ORDER granting 13 Motion to Dismiss: The claim against Defendant Bay County Sheriffs Office is DISMISSED with prejudice. Signed by JUDGE RICHARD SMOAK on 7/1/2014. (jem)
Page 1 of 3
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
PANAMA CITY DIVISION
CASE NO. 5:14-cv-102-RS-GRJ
BAY COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE, et al.,
Before me are Defendant Bay County Sheriff’s Office’s Motion to Dismiss
Complaint (Doc. 13), and Plaintiff’s Response in Opposition to Defendant’s
Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 14).
To overcome a motion to dismiss, a plaintiff must allege sufficient facts to
state a claim for relief that is plausible on its face. See Bell Atlantic Corp. v.
Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007). Granting a motion to dismiss is appropriate if it is
clear that no relief could be granted under any set of facts that could be proven
consistent with the allegations of the complaint. Hishon v. King & Spalding, 467
U.S. 69 (1984).
While considering a motion to dismiss, I must construe all allegations in the
complaint as true and in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. Shands Teaching
Hosp. and Clinics, Inc. v. Beech Street Corp., 208 F.3d 1308, 1310 (11th Cir.
Page 2 of 3
2000) (citing Lowell v. American Cyanamid Co., 177 F.3d 1228, 1229 (11th Cir.
Plaintiff has filed a complaint against Defendant Bay County Sheriff’s
Office for violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2721. Doc. 1. In support of Plaintiff’s claim,
Plaintiff alleges that in 2013, Defendant Robert Lee Garrison improperly accessed
Plaintiff’s and Ms. Parcell’s, Plaintiff’s mother, driver’s license information on the
Driver and Vehicle Information Database (DAVID). Id. He further alleges that
Defendant Bay County Sheriff’s Office violated the DPPA by “[i]ntentionally
obtaining, disclosing, or using [his] driver’s license information without an
authorized purpose . . . .” Id.
The Bay County Sheriff’s Office is not a legal entity and, thus, is not subject
to suit or liability under 18 U.S.C. § 2721, as Defendant Bay County Sheriff’s
Office lacks the capacity to be sued under Florida law. See Qamar v. Central
Intelligence Agency, No. 5:12-cv-1-RS-EMT, 2013 WL 5526518, (N.D.Fla Oct.
4,2013). As such, Defendant is not a proper party to this proceeding, and Count I
of the Complaint, as to Defendant Bay County Sheriff’s Office, is DISMISSED
Accordingly, the relief requested in Defendant Bay County Sheriff’s
Office’s Motion to Dismiss Complaint (Doc. 13) is GRANTED. The claim
against Defendant Bay County Sheriff’s Office is DISMISSED with prejudice.
Page 3 of 3
ORDERED on July 1, 2014.
/s/ Richard Smoak
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?