Stewart v. Allen et al

Filing 8

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER by Judge David J. Hale; The complaint is subject to dismissal. Before dismissing the action, the Court will provide Plaintiff a final opportunity to file an amended complaint. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff shall within 30 days amend his complaint to name Defendants in their individual capacities and/or to seek different relief. cc: Plaintiff, pro se; Defendant Head Nurse R.N. Christy; Counsel of record (ERH)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
LOUISVILLE DIVISION

MICHAEL STEWART,

Plaintiff,

v.

Civil Action No. 3:16-cv-P71-DJH

JAILER DANNY ALLEN et al.,

Defendants.
* * * * *

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff Michael Stewart, an inmate at the Hardin County Detention Center (HCDC),
filed the instant pro se 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action proceeding in forma pauperis. Plaintiff sues
Defendants HCDC Jailer Danny Allen and Head Nurse R.N. Christy in their official capacities
only.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, on May 31, 2016, the Court conducted an initial review
of the complaint and entered a Memorandum Opinion and Order (DN 6), which the Court
incorporates herein by reference, dismissing Plaintiff’s claims regarding his request to see a
dentist and retaliation. With regard to Plaintiff’s claims that he was denied medical treatment,
the Court found that the complaint and attachments read liberally identify a policy or policies
causing the alleged constitutional violations. The Court, therefore, found that the officialcapacity claims, construed as claims against the Defendants’ employers, Hardin County and
Southern Health Partners,1 concerning denial of medical treatment could continue. However,
Plaintiff’s only request for relief was punitive damages. Punitive damages can only be assessed
1

If an action is brought against an official of a governmental entity in his official capacity, the suit should
be construed as brought against the governmental entity. Will v. Mich. Dep’t of State Police, 491 U.S. 58,
71 (1989). This same municipal-liability analysis applies to a § 1983 claim against a private corporation
which contracts with the government to perform “a traditional state function such as providing medical
services to prison inmates . . . .” Hicks v. Frey, 992 F.2d 1450, 1458 (6th Cir. 1993); see also Street v.
Corr. Corp. of Am., 102 F.3d 810, 818 (6th Cir. 1996).

against an individual. White v. Dr., No. 3:11-00353, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5027543, at *3
(M.D. Tenn. Oct. 19, 2011). As stated by this Court in the May 31, 2016, Memorandum Opinion
and Order, requesting punitive damages in the complaint provides “some notice” of an intent to
hold a defendant personally liable, but is not dispositive. Rodgers v. Banks, 344 F.3d 587, 594
(6th Cir. 2003). Therefore, the Court ordered Plaintiff within 30 days of entry of the
Memorandum Opinion and Order to amend his complaint to name Defendants in their individual
capacities and/or seek different relief. See LaFountain v. Harry, 716 F.3d 944, 951 (6th Cir.
2013) (“[U]nder Rule 15(a) a district court can allow a plaintiff to amend his complaint even
when the complaint is subject to dismissal under the PLRA.”).2
More than 30 days have passed, and Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint.
Because Plaintiff sues Defendants in their official capacities only and seeks only punitive
damages, the complaint is subject to dismissal because “a municipality is immune from punitive
damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.” City of Newport v. Fact Concerts, Inc., 453 U.S. 247, 271
(1981); see also Center for Bio-Ethical Reform, Inc. v. City of Springboro, 477 F.3d 807, 818-19
(6th Cir. 2007).
However, before dismissing the action, the Court will provide Plaintiff a final opportunity
to file an amended complaint. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff shall within 30 days from entry of this Memorandum
and Order amend his complaint to name Defendants in their individual capacities and/or to seek
different relief, i.e., compensatory damages and/or injunctive relief. The Clerk of Court is
DIRECTED to send to Plaintiff a § 1983 form with this case number and “AMENDED” written
on it.

2

While service of process had not been ordered by the Court, Defendant Jailer Danny Allen filed an answer, by
counsel.

2

Plaintiff is WARNED that should he fail to file an amended complaint within
30 days, the Court will enter an Order dismissing the action for the reasons stated herein.
Date:

July 22, 2016

David J. Hale, Judge
United States District Court
cc:

Plaintiff, pro se
Defendant Head Nurse R.N. Christy
Counsel of record
4415.010

3