Riddle v. Sheriff Department et al

Filing 6

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER that clerk is DIRECTED to send the plaintiff a service packet for defendant Tim G. Fuller. The Franklin County Sheriff's Department is not a suable entity within the meaning of 42 USC 1983 and it is DISMISSED from this action. Plaintiff is ORDERED to complete the service packet for defendant Fuller and return it to the clerk's office within 20 days of the date of receipt of this order. Signed by District Judge Harry S Mattice, Jr on 7/15/10.

Download PDF
R i d d l e v. Sheriff Department et al Doc. 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT E A S T E R N DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE A T KNOXVILLE J U S T IN WAYNE RIDDLE, P l a in tif f , v. S H E R IF F TIM G. FULLER and F R A N K L I N COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, D e f e n d a n ts . 4 :1 0 -c v -4 2 M E M O R A N D U M AND ORDER T h i s pro se prisoner's civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 was filed in forma p a u p e ris in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, Nashville D iv i sio n , and transferred to this court without service of process. The Clerk is DIRECTED to send the plaintiff a service packet (a blank summons and USM 285 form) for defendant T im G. Fuller. The Franklin County Sheriff's Department is not a suable entity within the m e a n i n g of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and it is DISMISSED from this action. See Matthews v. Jones, 3 5 F.3d 1046, 1049 (6th Cir. 1994) (a police department is not an entity which can be sued u n d e r § 1983); see also De La Garza v. Kandiyohi County Jail, 18 F. App'x 436, 437 (8th C ir. 2001) (neither a county jail nor a sheriff's department is a suable entity); Dean v. Barber, 9 5 1 F.2d 1210, 1214 (11th Cir. 1992) ("[s]heriff's departments and police departments are Dockets.Justia.com n o t usually considered legal entities subject to suit"); Bradford v. Gardner, 578 F. Supp. 382, 3 8 3 (E.D. Tenn. 1984) ("the Sheriff's department itself is not a suable entity under Section 1 9 8 3 "). T h e plaintiff is ORDERED to complete the service packet for defendant Fuller and re tu rn it to the Clerk's Office within twenty (20) days of the date of receipt of this Order. At th a t time the summons will be signed and sealed by the Clerk and forwarded to the U.S. M a rs h a l for service. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4. The plaintiff is forewarned that failure to return the c o m p lete d service packet within the time required could jeopardize his prosecution of this a c ti o n . D e f e n d a n t Fuller shall answer or otherwise respond to the complaint within twenty (2 0 ) days from the date of service. Defendant's failure to timely respond to the complaint w ill result in entry of judgment by default against defendant Fuller. P la in t if f is ORDERED to inform the court, and the defendant or his counsel of rec o rd, immediately of any address changes. Failure to provide a correct address to this court w it h in ten (10) days following any change of address will result in the dismissal of this a c ti o n . ENTER: /s/Harry S. Mattice, Jr. HARRY S. MATTICE, JR. 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?