Keller v. Robertson County Detention Center et al, No. 3:2012cv00116 - Document 7 (M.D. Tenn. 2012)
Court Description: ORDER: As explained in the accompanying Memorandum Opinion, this Court finds that the plaintiff fails to state a claim against any of the named defendants for which relief may be granted. Accordingly, because the plaintiff fails to state a claim agai nst any named defendant for which relief may be granted, this action is hereby DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. All other pending motions are DENIED as moot. It is so ORDERED. This is a final judgment for purposes of Fed. R. Civ. P. 58. Signed by Chief Judge Todd J. Campbell on 2/2/12. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(tmw)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Keller v. Robertson County Detention Center et al Doc. 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE COLUMBIA DIVISION GEORGE J. KELLER, Plaintiff, v. ROBERTSON COUNTY DETENTION FACILITY and SOUTHERN HEALTH PARTNERS, Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 3:12-cv-00116 Judge Campbell ORDER Plaintiff George J. Keller, who is presently incarcerated at the Robertson County Detention Facility (“RCDF”), has filed a pro se complaint asserting claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging that the defendants, RCDF and Southern Health Partners, were deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs by denying him appropriate treatment (ECF No. 1). The Court has granted the plaintiff’s Application to Proceed in Forma Pauperis. Under the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA), the courts are required to screen a prisoner’s civil complaint where, as here, the complaint is filed in forma pauperis or if it seeks redress from a governmental entity or official. 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2), 1915A. After the initial screening, the Court must, based on the Sixth Circuit’s interpretation of the PLRA, dismiss the complaint sua sponte, before service on any defendant, if it is determined to be frivolous or malicious, if it fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted, or if it seeks monetary relief from a defendant immune from such relief. McGore v. Wrigglesworth, 114 F.3d 601, 612 (6th Cir. 1997), overruled on other grounds by Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. 199 (2007). As explained in the accompanying Memorandum Opinion, this Court finds that the plaintiff fails to state a claim against any of the named defendants for which relief may be granted. Under binding and unambiguous Sixth Circuit precedent, this Court has “no discretion in permitting a plaintiff to amend a complaint to avoid a sua sponte dismissal. If a complaint falls within the requirements of § 1915(e)(2) when filed, the district court should sua sponte dismiss the complaint.” McGore, 114 F.3d at 612. Accordingly, because the plaintiff fails to state a claim against any named defendant for which relief Dockets.Justia.com may be granted, this action is hereby DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. All other pending motions are DENIED as moot. It is so ORDERED. This is a final judgment for purposes of Fed. R. Civ. P. 58. Todd Campbell United States District Judge -2-
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
