TAPP v. THE EVANSVILLE POLICE DEPARTMENT et al
Filing
8
ENTRY Dismissing Insufficient Claim and Directing Service of Process; Evansville Police Department is dismissed; no partial final judgment shall issue as to the claim dismissed. Clerk to issue process to defendant Officer B.K. Watson. (copy to plaintiff via US Mail) Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 5/7/2013.(SMD)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
EVANSVILLE DIVISION
CARLESTER W. TAPP,
Plaintiff,
v.
EVANSVILLE POLICE DEPT., et al.,
Defendants,
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No. 3:13-cv-0017-JMS-WGH
Entry Dismissing Insufficient Claim and Directing Service of Process
I.
Plaintiff Carlester W. Tapp alleges that his constitutional rights were violated by the
Evansville Police Department and Officer B.K. Watson1 in the course of a search and his arrest
in March of 2012.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 1915(e)(2)(B), a court shall dismiss a case at any time if the court
determines that the action (i) is frivolous or malicious; (ii) fails to state a claim on which relief
may be granted; or (iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such
relief.
The claim against the Evansville Police Department is in all respects except for name
against the City of Evansville. Although a municipality is a Aperson@ subject to suit under ' 1983,
Monell v. Dept. of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658, 690 (1978), a municipality can be found liable
under ' 1983 only if action pursuant to an official policy or custom of the municipality causes a
constitutional tort. Id. at 690-91; Thomas v. Cook County Sheriff’s Dept., 604 F.3d 293, 306 (7th
1
The clerk shall update the docket to reflect the individual defendant as “Officer B. K. Watson.”
Cir. 2010) (plaintiff must show injuries were caused by policies or practices). The plaintiff has
alleged no municipal policy or custom concerning any constitutional violations.
In addition, alleging that the police department conspired with the defendant officer to
deprive plaintiff of his rights fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Ashcroft v.
Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (a “pleading that offers ‘labels and conclusions’ or ‘a formulaic
recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do.’ Nor does a complaint suffice if it
tenders ‘naked assertion[s]’ devoid of ‘further factual enhancement.’”) (quoting Bell Atlantic
Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 & 557 (2007)).
Thus, the plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted as to the
Evansville Police Department.
No partial final judgment shall issue as to the claim dismissed in this Entry.
II.
The clerk is designated pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c) to issue process to defendant
Officer B. K. Watson in the manner specified by Rule 4(d). Process shall consist of the
complaint filed on January 31, 2013, applicable forms (Notice of Lawsuit and Request for
Waiver of Service of Summons and Waiver of Service of Summons), and this Entry.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
_______________________________
05/07/2013
Date: __________________
Hon. Jane Magnus-Stinson, Judge
United States District Court
Southern District of Indiana
NOTE TO CLERK: PROCESSING THIS DOCUMENT REQUIRES ACTIONS IN ADDITION TO DOCKETING AND DISTRIBUTION.
Distribution:
CARLESTER W. TAPP
1321 S. Alvord Blvd.
Evansville, IN 47714
Officer B. K. Watson
Evansville Police Department
15 NW Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd.
Evansville, IN 47708
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?