Newton v. Rappahannock Regional Jail
Newton v. Rappahannock Regional Jail
Trial Court Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division DESMINE A. NEWTON, Plaintiff, Vv. Civil No. 3:23ev822 (DJN) RAPPAHANNOCK REGIONAL JAIL, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff, a Virginia inmate proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this
42 U.S.C. § 1983action. To state a viable claim under
42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege that a person acting under color of state law deprived him or her of a constitutional right or of a right conferred by a law of the United States. See Dowe v. Total Action Against Poverty in Roanoke Valley,
145 F.3d 653, 658(4th Cir. 1998) (citing
42 U.S.C. § 1983). Neither “inanimate objects such as buildings, facilities, and grounds” nor collective terms such as “staff” or “agency” are persons amenable to suit under § 1983. Lamb v. Library People Them,
2013 WL 526887, at *2— 3 (D.S.C. Jan. 22, 2013) (explaining that the plaintiffs “use of the collective term ‘people them’ as a means to name a defendant in a § 1983 claim does not adequately name a ‘person’”); see Preval v. Reno,
2000 WL 20591, at *1 (4th Cir. 2000) (affirming district court’s determination that Piedmont Regional Jail does not constitute a “person” under § 1983). Accordingly, by Memorandum Order entered on April 3, 2024, the Court directed Plaintiff to file a particularized complaint. (ECF No. 8.) The Court warned Plaintiff that the failure to submit the particularized complaint would result in the dismissal of the action.
On April 18, 2024, the Court received a notice of change of address from Plaintiff. (ECF No. 9.) Because it was unclear whether Plaintiff received the April 3, 2024 Memorandum Order, the Clerk remailed the order to Plaintiff on April 22, 2024. More than thirty (30) days have elapsed since the Clerk remailed the April 3, 2024 Memorandum Order to Plaintiff. Plaintiff failed to submit a particularized complaint or otherwise respond to the April 3, 2024 Memorandum Order. Accordingly, the action will be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. An appropriate Final Order will accompany this Memorandum Opinion. Let the Clerk file a copy of the Memorandum Opinion electronically and send a copy to Plaintiff.
/s/ | David J. Novak United States District Judge Richmond, Virginia Dated: May 30, 2024
Reference
- Status
- Unknown