Farmer v. Parker et al

Filing 47

ORDER: The Court has reviewed these pleadings and the record de novo and finds that the plaintiffs objections lack merit. Therefore, the plaintiff's objections are OVERRULED. The Report and Recommendation 40 is ADOPTED AND APPROVED in all resp ects. Defendants' Motions to Dismiss 25 & 27 are hereby GRANTED and the claims against them are DISMISSED. Signed by District Judge Aleta A. Trauger on 10/4/12. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(dt) Modified Text on 10/5/2012 (dt).

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION KEITH LAMONT FARMER Plaintiff, v. CPL. CHRIS PARKER, et al. Defendants. ] ] ] ] ] ] ] No. 3:12-0489 Judge Trauger O R D E R Presently before the Court are Motions to Dismiss from Sheriff Daron Hall (Docket Entry No.25) and the Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County (Docket Entry No.27), a Report and Recommendation (Docket Entry No.40) from the Magistrate Judge urging the Court to grant the Motions, and plaintiff’s timely objections (Docket Entry No.45) to the Report and Recommendation. The plaintiff was allegedly assaulted by a guard at the Davidson County Criminal Justice Center without provocation. Nowhere in the plaintiff’s recitation of the facts does he mention either Sheriff Hall or the Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County. The plaintiff, therefore, is suggesting that liability should attach to these defendants based solely upon their positions as the supervisor and employer of the alleged tortfeasor. The Magistrate Judge has correctly concluded that Sheriff Hall and Metro Government can not be held liable for a civil rights violation in the absence of proof that they at least implicitly authorized, approved or knowingly acquiesced in the unconstitutional conduct of an offending subordinate. Bellamy v. Bradley, 729 F.2d 416,421 (6th Cir.1984). No such proof has been offered by the plaintiff. In his objections, the plaintiff claims that these defendants should be held liable because they failed to adequately train the alleged tortfeasor in the care and treatment of prisoners. However, this assertion never appears in the complaint. Nor has the plaintiff asserted that he was assaulted as a matter of policy, course or custom. Accordingly, the Court has reviewed these pleadings and the record de novo and finds that the plaintiff’s objections lack merit. Therefore, the plaintiff’s objections are OVERRULED. The Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED AND APPROVED in all respects. Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss are hereby GRANTED and the claims against them are DISMISSED. It is so ORDERED. ____________________________ Aleta A. Trauger United States District Judge

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?