Combs v. Commonwealth of Kentucky

District Court, E.D. Kentucky

Combs v. Commonwealth of Kentucky

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY NORTHERN DIVISION AT COVINGTON

ADAM COMBS, ) ) Plaintiff, ) Civil No. 2: 21-63-WOB ) V. ) ) COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY, ) MEMORANDUM OPINION ) AND ORDER Defendant. )

*** *** *** *** Adam Combs is an inmate at the Kenton County Detention Center in Covington, Kentucky. Proceeding without counsel, Combs has filed a complaint alleging violations of his First and Eighth Amendment rights. [R. 1.] In his complaint, Combs seeks two million dollars in damages under

42 U.S.C. § 1983

for the Kenton County Detention Center’s failure to provide him with kosher meals. [Id.] The matter is now before the Court for screening under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Pursuant to this statute, the Court shall dismiss the complaint, or any portion of the complaint, if it is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from the requested relief. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). As a preliminary matter, the Court notes that Combs has failed to properly initiate this federal action and that the case runs afoul of both the Court’s Local Rules and the Prison Litigation Reform Act. The complaint is not written on a form approved for use by the Court. See LR 5.3(a)(3). Further, Combs failed to either pay the $402.00 in filing and administrative fees or to move for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. See LR 5.4(a)(2);

28 U.S.C. § 1915

(a)(2). But even regardless of these deficiencies, Combs’s complaint must be dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(2). The only defendant Combs formally identifies in his complaint is the Commonwealth of Kentucky. [See R. 1.] However, the Commonwealth is immune from suit. The Eleventh Amendment bars

42 U.S.C. § 1983

suits for money damages against a state. See, e.g., Kentucky v. Graham,

473 U.S. 159, 169

(1985); Cady v. Arenac Co.,

574 F.3d 334, 342

(6th Cir. 2009). Accordingly, because Combs “seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief,” see 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(2), his complaint will be dismissed upon screening. For these reasons, the Court hereby ORDERS as follows: 1. Combs’s complaint [R. 1] is DISMISSED; 2. This matter is CLOSED and STRICKEN from the Court’s active docket; and 3. Judgment will be entered contemporaneously herewith. This the 17th day of May, 2021. . | SEER _ Signed By: 0. Py William O. Bertelsman }\()B ‘S=" —_United States District Judge

Reference

Status
Unknown