McBee v. Campbell County Detention Center et al

Filing 6

MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: 1) McBee's complaint in this action ( 1 at 15-16) is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; 2) McBee's motion preliminary injunction 3 is DENIED AS MOOT; 3) This action is STRICKEN from the Court's docket; 4) A corresponding judgment will be entered this date. Signed by Judge William O. Bertelsman on 8/10/2017.(ECO)cc: Copy of Memorandum Opinion and Order mailed to Richard McBee, pro se Plf, at address listed on the docket sheet

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
NORTHERN DIVISION at COVINGTON
RICHARD MCBEE,
Plaintiff,
v.
CAMPBELL CO. DET. CENTER, et al.,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Civil Action No. 2: 17-38-WOB

MEMORANDUM OPINION
AND ORDER

*** *** *** ***
In 2016, plaintiff Richard McBee filed a pro se civil rights complaint in this Court asserting
over a dozen claims loosely related to the ongoing criminal prosecution against him and to the
conditions of his confinement at the Campbell County Detention Center. [R. 1]. The Court
conducted a preliminary review of McBee’s complaint and determined that he improperly alleged
multiple distinct claims against several different defendants in one case. [R. 4]. While the Court
resolved some of those claims, it severed the remaining claims from McBee’s complaint and
directed the Clerk of the Court to open new civil actions in which those unrelated claims could be
resolved. [R. 4].
This case is one of those new civil actions, and it involves only McBee’s claim that the
defendants failed to provide him with a Kosher diet and, thus, violated his First Amendment rights,
the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, and various provisions of state law.
[R. 1 at 15-16, 29]. McBee has also filed a motion for a preliminary injunction regarding this issue.
[R. 3].

-1-

The Court, however, will deny McBee’s claims without prejudice because he has not
provided any substance to his one conclusory allegation—that the diet he received and was
apparently identified as Kosher was not truly Kosher. [R. 1 at 15-16]. For example, McBee does
not describe with any particularity his religious dietary needs, the actual food that was provided to
him, and what injuries he suffered. Simply put, McBee has given the Court very little to go on
and, for that reason, the Court will dismiss his claims without prejudice. That said, McBee is
certainly welcome to file a new complaint in which he provides the Court with more information
regarding the basis for his religious-based claims.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that:
1.

McBee’s complaint in this action [R. 1 at 15-16] is DISMISSED WITHOUT
PREJUDICE.

2.

McBee’s motion for a preliminary injunction [R. 3] is DENIED AS MOOT.

3.

This action is STRICKEN from the Court’s docket.

4.

A corresponding judgment will be entered this date.

This 10th day of August, 2017.

-2-