Farmer v. Davidson County Sheriff's Office et al

Filing 3

MEMORANDUM signed by District Judge Kevin H. Sharp on 5/9/2012. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(hb)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
NASHVILLE DIVISION

KEITH LAMONT FARMER
Plaintiff,
v.
DAVIDSON COUNTY SHERIFF’S
OFFICE, et al.
Defendants.

]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]

No. 3:12-0434
Judge Sharp

M E M O R A N D U M
The plaintiff, proceeding pro se, is an inmate at the Davidson
County Criminal Justice Center in Nashville. He brings this action
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the Davidson County Sheriff’s
Office; Daron Hall, Sheriff of Davidson County; ABL Management Food
Services; the Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson
County; and five members of the Davidson County Sheriff’s Office;
seeking damages.
In December, 2011, the plaintiff began to eat his lunch when
he realized that he had bitten into something sharp. The sharp
object left deep cuts in the plaintiff’s mouth and caused him a
great deal of bleeding. The plaintiff believes that the defendants
should compensate him for his injuries.
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 guaranteed by the Constitution

or laws of the United States. Parratt v. Taylor, 101 S.Ct. 1908
(1981).
In essence, the plaintiff claims that his injuries were a
result of the defendants’ negligence. Negligent conduct, however,
is not actionable under § 1983 because it does not rise to the
level of a constitutional deprivation. Estelle v. Gamble, 97S.Ct.
285 (1976). This is true with respect to negligence claims arising
under both the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. Whitley v. Albers,
106 S.Ct. 1078, 1084 (1986)(Eighth Amendment); Daniels v. Williams,
106

S.Ct.

plaintiff

662,
has

666
failed

(1986)(Fourteenth
to

allege

Amendment).

conduct

that

Thus,

the

violates

the

Constitution.
In the absence of a constitutional violation, the plaintiff is
unable to prove every element of his cause of action. Therefore,
the plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which § 1983 relief
can be granted. Under such circumstances, the Court is obliged to
dismiss the instant action sua sponte. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).
An appropriate order will be entered.

____________________________
Kevin H. Sharp
United States District Judge