Allen v. Rutherford Co. Sheriff's Office et al

Filing 3

MEMORANDUM OPINION OF THE COURT. Signed by District Judge Aleta A. Trauger on 2/22/16. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.) (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.) (afs)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
NASHVILLE DIVISION

GEORGE MAURICE ALLEN
Plaintiff,
v.
RUTHERFORD COUNTY SHERIFF’S
OFFICE, et al.
Defendants.

]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]

No. 3:16-0202
Judge Trauger

MEMORANDUM

The plaintiff, proceeding pro se, is an inmate at the Rutherford County Adult Detention
Center in Murfreesboro, Tennessee. He brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the
Rutherford County Sheriff’s Office and the Rutherford County Adult Detention Center, seeking
injunctive relief and damages.
The plaintiff complains that his mail is continually being given to another inmate by mistake.
To establish a claim for § 1983 relief, the plaintiff must plead and prove that a person or persons,
while acting under color of state law, deprived him of some right guaranteed by the Constitution or
laws of the United States. Parratt v. Taylor, 451 U.S. 527, 535 (1981).
A county jail or workhouse is not a person that can be sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Rhodes
v.McDannel, 945 F.2d 117, 120 (6th Cir. 1991). Nor is a county sheriff’s department subject to suit
under § 1983. Petty v. County of Franklin, Ohio, 478 F.3d 341, 347 (6th Cir. 2007).
Of course, giving this pro se pleading a liberal construction, the Court could construe the
1

complaint as an attempt to state a claim against Rutherford County, the entity responsible for the
operation of the Adult Detention Center. However, for Rutherford County to be liable, the plaintiff
would have to allege and prove that his constitutional rights were being violated pursuant to a
“policy statement, ordinance, regulation or decision officially adopted and promulgated” by the
county. Monell v. Department of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658, 689-690 (1978). No such allegation
appears in the complaint. Therefore, the plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be
granted. Under such circumstances, the Court is obliged to dismiss the complaint sua sponte. 28
U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).
An appropriate order will be entered.

______________________________
Aleta A. Trauger
United States District Judge

2