Kimble v. Louisiana State et al

Filing 206

ORDER ADOPTING 104 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. IT IS ORDERED that Parish of Jefferson's 96 Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part, as stated in document. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court terminate Parish of Jefferson's 176 Objection to Report and Recommendations, which the Court considered in reaching this determination. Signed by Judge Jay C. Zainey on 8/1/2022.(cwa)

Case 2:21-cv-00409-JCZ-DPC Document 206 Filed 08/01/22 Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
RAYMOND HAROLD KIMBLE, III

CIVIL ACTION

VERSUS

NO. 21-409

PARISH OF JEFFERSON, ET AL.

SECTION “A”(2)
ORDER

The Court, after considering the complaint, the record, the applicable law, the Magistrate
Judge’s Report and Recommendation, and the objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and
Recommendation, hereby approves the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation and
adopts it as its opinion. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that Parish of Jefferson’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 96) is DENIED
in part as moot because plaintiff Raymond Harold Kimble, III’s Claim Nos. One through Four
and part of Claim Ten as asserted against Parish of Jefferson have already been dismissed with
prejudice as frivolous and otherwise for failure to state a claim for which relief can be granted as
part of the court’s frivolousness review.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Parish of Jefferson’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 96)
is DENIED in part to the extent it seeks to have Kimble’s pauper status revoked because Kimble
was not subject to the three-strikes rule under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) when pauper status was granted.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Parish of Jefferson’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 96)
is DENIED in part as it relates to Kimble’s denial of access to the courts claim asserted in Claim
Ten.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Parish of Jefferson’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 96)
is GRANTED in part as to Kimble’s Claim Nos. Five through Ten where he seeks to hold Parish
of Jefferson liable based on Monell v. Dept. of Social Servs. of City of New York, 436 U.S. 658

Case 2:21-cv-00409-JCZ-DPC Document 206 Filed 08/01/22 Page 2 of 2

(1978), or other theories of municipal liability, for a prison design that denies him privacy, and for
negligent repairs or damages for his slip and fall because Kimble thereby fails to state a claim for
which relief can be granted under § 1983 and these claims against Parish of Jefferson are
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court terminate Parish of Jefferson’s
Objection to Report and Recommendations (Rec. Doc. 176), which the Court considered in
reaching this determination.
Kimble’s remaining claims against Parish of Jefferson and the other remaining defendants
remain referred to the undersigned Magistrate Judge for further proceedings consistent with the
automatic referral under Local Rule 73.2(A).
8/1/2022
____________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2