Jordan M. Leffel v. Colby Crum, et al.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS JORDAN M. LEFFEL, Plaintiff, v. CASE NO. 26-3055-JWL COLBY CRUM, et al., Defendants.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff brings this pro se civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Although Plaintiff is currently incarcerated at the El Dorado Correctional Facility in El Dorado, Kansas, his claims relate to his incarceration at the Lansing Correctional Facility in Lansing, Kansas. The Court granted Plaintiff leave to proceed in forma pauperis. On April 6, 20206, the Court entered a Memorandum and Order (Doc. 5) finding that the proper processing of Plaintiff’s claims could not be achieved without additional information from appropriate Kansas Department of Corrections officials and ordered the preparation of a Martinez Report. This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Amendment of Complaint (Doc. 8).

Plaintiff seeks to add the Lansing Correctional Facility as a defendant. (Doc. 8, at 1.)

Plaintiff has not submitted a proposed amended complaint as required by D. Kan. Rule 15.1(2) (“A party filing a motion to amend . . . must: . . . (2) attach the proposed amended pleading”).

The Court finds that such an amendment would be futile. A correctional facility is not a proper defendant. “To state a claim under § 1983, a plaintiff must allege the violation of a right secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States, and must show that the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under color of state law.” West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988) (emphasis added). Prison and jail facilities are not proper defendants because none is a “person” subject to suit for money damages under § 1983. See Will v. Michigan Dept. of State Police, 491 U.S. 58, 66, 71 (1989); Clark v. Anderson, No. 09-3141-SAC, 2009 WL 2355501, at *1 (D. Kan. July 29, 2009); see also Aston v. Cunningham, No. 99–4156, 2000 WL 796086 at *4 n.3 (10th Cir. Jun. 21, 2000) (“a detention facility is not a person or legally created entity capable of being sued”). Plaintiff’s motion seeking to amend his Complaint to add the Lansing Correctional Facility as a defendant is denied.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED BY THE COURT that Plaintiff’s Motion for Amendment of Complaint (Doc. 8) is denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated May 14, 2026, in Kansas City, Kansas.

S/ John W. Lungstrum JOHN W. LUNGSTRUM UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE