Daily v. Hulan et al

Filing 4

MEMORANDUM. An appropriate order will be entered. Signed by Chief Judge Todd J. Campbell on 9/6/11. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(tmw)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
COLUMBIA DIVISION

LEVAR FIVE DAILY
Plaintiff,
v.
GRUMPY’S BAIL BONDS, et al.
Defendants.

]
]
]
]
]
]
]

No. 1:11-0073
Judge Campbell

M E M O R A N D U M
The plaintiff, proceeding pro se, is an inmate at the Marshall
County Jail in Lewisburg, Tennessee. He brings this action pursuant
to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Grumpy’s Bail Bonds and its owner, Leah
Hulan, seeking injunctive relief and damages.
The defendant, Grumpy’s Bail Bonds, posted bond for the
plaintiff while he was awaiting trial. When the plaintiff failed to
appear

for

a

pre-trial

hearing,

the

bond

was

revoked.

As

a

consequence, the defendants confiscated a motor vehicle belonging
to the plaintiff. In addition, the defendants began to run media
ads

identifying

the

plaintiff

and

asking

for

help

with

his

recapture.
The plaintiff claims that the defendants had no right to
confiscate his motor vehicle. He also asserts that the defendants’
media ads were slanderous.
To establish a claim for § 1983 relief, the plaintiff must

plead and prove that the defendants, while acting under color of
state law, deprived him of a right or privilege guaranteed by the
Constitution or laws of the United States. Parratt v. Taylor, 451
U.S. 527, 535 (1981).
In this instance, the plaintiff entered into a contractual
agreement with the defendants in order to obtain bail for his pretrial release. When the plaintiff fled, the defendants acted
according to the terms of their contract. The defendants were not
acting

under

color

of

state

law

when

they

confiscated

the

plaintiff’s property to pay for the bond that had been forfeited.
Nor were they acting under color of state law when they ran media
ads in an attempt to hasten his recapture. Thus, plaintiff’s claims
against these defendants are not actionable under § 1983. Hassink
v. Mottl, 2002 WL 31181983 (6th Cir.(Ohio); 9/30/02)(bail bondsman
not considered a state actor).
When a prisoner plaintiff proceeding in forma pauperis has
failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, the Court
is obliged to dismiss the instant action sua sponte. 28 U.S.C. §
1915(e)(2).
An appropriate order will be entered.

____________________________
Todd Campbell
United States District Judge