Fluker v. Davidson County Sheriff's Office

Full title: CHRIS L. FLUKER, Plaintiff, v. DAVIDSON COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE, ET AL.…

Court: United States District Court, M.D. Tennessee, Nashville Division

Date published: Apr 30, 2009

No. 3:09mc0082 (M.D. Tenn. Apr. 30, 2009)

Opinion

No. 3:09mc0082.

April 30, 2009

MEMORANDUM

TODD CAMPBELL, District Judge

The plaintiff, proceeding pro se and in forma pauper is, is a prisoner in the Criminal Justice Center in Nashville. He brings this action under 42 U S.C. § 1983 against the Davidson County Sheriff's office and five named defendants The plaintiff seeks money damages and injunctive relief.

The complaint stems from a November 15, 2008 shakedown, during which the plaintiff alleges that his dentures were broken. (Docket Entry No 1, ¶ IV, p 3) According to the plaintiff, he filed grievances regarding the alleged incident, but to no avail (Docket Entry No. 1, ¶ IV, pp. 3-4) The plaintiff alleges that his grievance has been ignored, and that the defendants have engaged in a coverup to suppress the truth. (Docket Entry No 1, ¶ IV, pp. 3-4)

To state a claim under § 1983, the plaintiff must allege and show: 1) that he was deprived of a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States; and 2) that the deprivation was caused by a person acting under color of state law. Parratt v Taylor, 451 U S. 527, 535 (1981) (overruled in part by Daniels v Williams, 474 U.S 327, 330 (1986)); Flagg Bros v Brooks, 436 U S. 149, 155-56 (1978); Black v Barberton Citizens Hosp, 134 F.3d 1265, 1267 (6^th Cir. 1998) Both parts of this two-part test must be satisfied to support a claim under § 1983 See Christy v Randlett, 932 F 2d 502, 504 (6^th Cir 1991)

Under the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA), the courts are required to dismiss a prisoner's complaint if it is determined to be frivolous, malicious, or if it fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). A complaint is frivolous and warrants dismissal when the claims "lack[] an arguable basis in law or fact." Neitzke v Williams, 490 U.S 319, 325 (1989) Claims lack an arguable basis in law or fact if they contain factual allegations that are fantastic or delusional, or if they are based on legal theories that are indisputably meritless Id at 327-28; Brown v Bargery, 207 F 3d 863, 866 (6^th Cir 2000); see also Lawler v Marshall, 898 F.2d 1196, 1198-99 (6^th Cir. 1990) Although the federal courts are required to construe pro se complaints liberally, see Boag v MacDougall, 454 U.S. 364, 365 (1982), under the PLRA, the "courts have no discretion in permitting a plaintiff to amend a complaint to avoid a sua sponte dismissal," McGore v Wrigglesworth, 114 F 3d 601, 612 (6^th Cir. 1997)

A successful § 1983 claimant must establish that the defendants acted knowingly or intentionally to violate his constitutional rights; mere negligence, recklessness, or mistakes are insufficient. Daniels, 474 U S at 333-36; Ahlers v Schebil, 188 F 3d 365, 373 (6^th Cir 1999); Howard v Grinage, 6 F 3d 410, 415 (6^th Cir. 1993) The plaintiff does not allege, nor can it be liberally construed from the complaint, that the defendants broke his dentures knowingly and/or intentionally Absent an allegation and supporting facts to that end, the plaintiff cannot support a claim against the defendants under § 1983 based on the mere fact that his dentures were broken.

The plaintiff's only other apparent claim is that the defendants conspired during the grievance process to thwart his effort to resolve the matter However, state law does not create a liberty interest in a jail/prison grievance procedure Ilim v. Wakinekona, 461 U.S 238, 249 (1983). In other words, the plaintiff cannot premise a § 1983 claim based on allegations that the defendants' conspiracy to suppress the truth during the grievance process rendered the grievance procedure inadequate and/or unresponsive, because the plaintiff has no inherent constitutional right to an adequate and/or responsive grievance procedure in the first place. See Hewitt v. Helms, 459 U.S 460, 467 (1983) (overruled in part on other grounds by Sandin v Conner, 515 U.S. 472 (1995)); Argue v Hofmeyer, 80 Fed Appx 427, 430 (6^th Cir. 2003) (citing Antonelli v Shehan, 81 F 3d 1422, 1430 (7^th Cir 1996)); Adams v Rice, 40 F 3d 72, 75 (4^th Cir 1994); Flick v. Alba, 932 F 2d 728, 729 (8^th Cir. 1991)

For the reasons explained herein, the complaint lacks an arguable basis in law or fact. Accordingly, the complaint will be dismissed as frivolous

An appropriate order will enter