Green v. County of Gallatin et al
Filing
18
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 10 in full. Claims against the Gallatin County Detention Center and the Gallatin County Sheriffs Department are DISMISSED with prejudice. Signed by Judge Brian Morris on 6/18/2018. Mailed to Green. (TAG)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA
BUTTE DIVISION
NATHAN FREMONT GREEN,
Plaintiff,
CV-17-13-BU-BMM
vs.
COUNTY OF GALLATIN, OFFICER
NEWTON, GALLATIN COUNTY
DETENTION CENTER, and
GALLATIN COUNTY SHERIFF’S
DEPARTMENT,
ORDER
Defendants.
Plaintiff Nathan Green (Green) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se. Green
filed a Complaint on March 15, 2017. (Doc. 1). The named Defendants are
Gallatin County, Correction Officer Newton, the Gallatin County Detention Center,
and the Gallatin County Sheriff’s Department. Id. Green alleges that the
Defendants violated his rights under the United States Constitution in contravention
of 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Id. Green alleges that the Defendants are liable because
Defendant Newton refused to allow him to use the toilet in his cell for an undefined
period of time as punishment for not making his bed before breakfast. (Doc. 1-1 at
1).
United States Magistrate Judge Jeremiah Lynch conducted an initial
screening of Green’s Complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. (Doc. 10 at 2). Judge
Lynch determined that the Complaint failed to state cognizable claims against the
Gallatin County Detention Center and the Gallatin County Sheriff’s Department.
(Doc. 10 at 8-12). Judge Lynch explained why the Complaint failed to state
cognizable claims for relief against the Gallatin County Detention Center and the
Gallatin County Sheriff’s Department. Id.
Judge Lynch issued Findings and Recommendations in this matter on
November 17, 2017. (Doc. 10). Judge Lynch recommended that the Court dismiss
Green’s claims against the Gallatin County Detention Center and the Gallatin
County Sheriff’s Department. (Doc. 10 at 12). Green filed a response to Judge
Lynch’s Findings and Recommendations on April 30, 2018. (Doc. 15). Green
conceded that the claims against the Gallatin County Detention Center and the
Gallatin County Sheriff’s Department should be dismissed. (Doc. 15 at 4).
The Court has reviewed Judge Lynch’s Findings and Recommendations for
clear error. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore Bus. Mach., Inc., 656 F.2d
1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981). The Court finds no error in Judge Lynch’s Findings
and Recommendations, and adopts them in full. The Gallatin County Detention
Center and the Gallatin County Sheriff’s Department are not entities capable of
-2-
being sued. A detention center is not an entity. A detention center is a building.
Montana law defines a detention center as “a facility established and maintained by
an appropriate entity for the purpose of confining arrested persons or persons
sentenced to the detention center.” Mont. Code Ann. § 7-32-2120(1). A building
cannot be sued. Barnes v. Missoula County Detention Facility, 2008 WL 5412448,
*1 (D. Mont. 2008).
The Gallatin County Sheriff’s Department does not exist as a governmental
entity or political subdivision with the capacity to be sued. See Mont. Code Ann.
§§ 2-9-101(3), (5) and 2-9-102. The Gallatin County Sheriff’s Department is a
departmental subunit of Gallatin County. Governmental departments are not
subject to liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See Burkhart v. Knepper, 310 F. Supp.
2d 734, 738 (W.D. Pa. 2004); Stump v. Gates, 777 F. Supp. 808, 815 (D. Colo.
1991); Alston v. County of Sacramento, 2012 WL 2839825, *2 (E.D. Cal. 2012).
Section 1983 claims against departments or subunits are unnecessary as they are
duplicative of claims against the larger governmental entity of which they are a part.
See Carroll v. City of Hercules, 2012 WL 1122019, *2 (N.D. Cal. 2012).
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED:
Green’s claims against the Gallatin County Detention Center and the
-3-
Gallatin County Sheriff’s Department are DISMISSED with prejudice.
DATED this 18th day of June, 2018.
-4-
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?