Richardson v. The Baltimore City Detention

Filing 6

MEMORANDUM. Signed by Judge James K. Bredar on 3/24/2015. (c/m 3/25/2015 bas, Deputy Clerk)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND ZANDER LAMONT RICHARDSON, JR. #412-735 : Plaintiff : v. : CIVIL ACTION NO. JKB-15-650 THE BALTIMORE CITY DETENTION CENTER OFFICER TYWOO OFFICER MARTIN : : : Defendants MEMORANDUM Plaintiff filed a civil rights complaint, as supplemented, against the Baltimore City Detention Center (“BCDC”) and Officers Tywoo and Martin, seeking money damages for the failure to protect him from a stabbing alleged to have occurred between January 20-30, 2012, while plaintiff was housed at the Baltimore City Detention Center. (ECF Nos. 1 and 4). This is plaintiff’s second lawsuit concerning injuries allegedly sustained in this incident. Richardson v. Tywoo, Civil Action No. JKB-14-595 (D. Md.), was dismissed without prejudice after counsel for the Maryland Attorney General indicated that a search of personnel records produced no record that a correctional officer with the surname Tywoo (or a similarly spelled name) was employed with the Division of Pretrial Detention and Services between June 2, 2010 and April of 2012. Counsel further indicated that only one of four officers named “Martin” may have worked at the Baltimore City Detention Center during the relevant time period, but that in the absence of additional identifying information, counsel cannot determine whether that person may have been assigned to the area where plaintiff was housed. Id., ECF No. 11. Plaintiff was granted an opportunity here to provide additional identifying information concerning the defendants. ECF No. 12. He has failed to do so. A separate Order dismissing the case follows. March 24, 2015 Date ________/s/____________________ James K. Bredar United States District Judge 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?