Puckett v. Big Sandy Regional Detention Center
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: 1. Puckett's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis 3 is GRANTED and payment of filing and administrative fees is WAIVED. 2. Puckett's claims against Big Sandy Regional Detention Center 1 are DISMISSED with prejudice. 3. All other pending motions are DENIED AS MOOT. 4. This action is DISMISSED and STRICKEN from Court's docket. 5. A corresponding judgment will be entered this date. Signed by Judge Karen K. Caldwell on 11/14/2017. (RCB)cc: COR, Puckett via US mail
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
SOUTHERN DIVISION at PIKEVILLE
LANCE DAVID PUCKETT,
Civil Action No. 7:17-169-KKC
BIG SANDY REGIONAL DETENTION
*** *** *** ***
Lance David Puckett is a resident of Salyersville, Kentucky. Proceeding without a lawyer,
Puckett filed a complaint against the Big Sandy Regional Detention Center, a correctional facility
operated by four counties in eastern Kentucky. [R. 1]. Puckett claims that, in November 2016,
while he was incarcerated at the detention center, he “was forcibly sodomized by another inmate,
[and] staff failed to prevent, intervene or provide treatment after [the] incident occurred.” [Id. at 4].
Puckett is seeking more than $75,000 in damages. [Id.]. Puckett also filed a motion for leave to
proceed in forma pauperis. [R. 3].
The Court will grant Puckett’s fee motion because he lacks sufficient assets or income to
pay the filing and administrative fees in this case. That said, the Court will dismiss Puckett’s
complaint because it fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Puckett lists the Big
Sandy Regional Detention Center as the only defendant in this action, and that facility is simply a
building and not a person or legal entity which may be sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See Marbry
v. Corr. Med. Servs., 238 F.3d 422, 2000 WL 1720959, at *2 (6th Cir. 2000) (holding that the
Shelby County Jail is not subject to suit under § 1983). Plus, even if the Court construes Puckett’s
complaint as alleging claims against one of the counties that operates the detention center, Puckett
is not complaining about a county policy or custom and, therefore, he fails to state a claim for
relief against a county. See Thomas v. City of Chattanooga, 398 F.3d 426, 429 (6th Cir. 2005)
(citing Monell v. New York City Dep’t of Soc. Servs., 436 U.S. 658, 690 (1978)).
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED as follows:
Puckett’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis [R. 3] is GRANTED and
payment of the filing and administrative fees is WAIVED.
Puckett’s claims against the Big Sandy Regional Detention Center [R. 1] are
DISMISSED with prejudice.
All other pending motions are DENIED AS MOOT.
This action is DISMISSED and STRICKEN from the Court’s docket.
A corresponding judgment will be entered this date.
Dated November 14, 2017.
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?