Doutaz v. Bullitt County et al
Filing
22
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER signed by Judge John G. Heyburn, II on 8/4/2011. For the reasons set forth, 11 Motion to Dismiss is SUSTAINED and the Court will DISMISS WITHOUT PREJUDICE Plaintiff's Whistleblower Statute claim. cc: Counsel (AEP)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
AT LOUISVILLE
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:10-CV-724-H
CHARLES DOUTAZ, JR.
PLAINTIFF
V.
BULLITT COUNTY, by and through,
the BULLITT COUNTY FISCAL COURT, et al.
DEFENDANTS
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, Charles Doutaz, Jr., is a former employee of Bullitt County, and he filed suit
against Bullitt County, Bullitt County Judge-Executive Melanie Roberts, and current Bullitt
County employee Jim Stivers. Plaintiff alleges that his termination violated his First and
Fourteenth Amendment Rights as protected under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 as well as his rights under
the Kentucky Whistleblower Statute, KRS 61.101, et seq. The matter is before the Court on
Defendants’ motion to dismiss the Whistleblower Statute claim.1
The Sixth Circuit has held that the Whistleblower Statute does not waive the sovereign
immunity afforded to the Commonwealth of Kentucky and its political subdivisions in federal
court. Rose v. Stephens, 291 F.3d 917, 925 (6th Cir. 2002). As a political subdivision of the
Commonwealth of Kentucky, therefor, Bullitt County has immunity from suit in this Court. In
the face of this undeniable holding, Plaintiff argues that, for the sake of judicial economy, the
Court should deny Defendants’ motion and prevent Plaintiff from having to file a separate suit in
state court. The interest of judicial economy, however, does not trump the Commonwealth’s
1
Plaintiff clarified in his response to Defendants’ motion that the Whisteblower Statute claim is against
Bullitt County only, and not against any of the individual defendants.
immunity from suit in federal court afforded to it by the Eleventh Amendment of the United
States Constitution.
Being otherwise sufficiently advised,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants’ motion to dismiss is SUSTAINED and the
Court will DISMISS WITHOUT PREJUDICE Plaintiff’s Whisteblower Statute claim.
August 4, 2011
cc:
Counsel of Record
2
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?