Bethel, Jr v. Clark et al, No. 3:2018cv00003 - Document 10 (E.D. Va. 2018)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge Henry E. Hudson on 07/19/2018. Copy mailed to Plaintiff. (walk, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Bethel, Jr v. Clark et al Doc. 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division clerk, u s. DISTRICT COURT RICHMOND. VA RAYMOND V. BETHEL,JR., Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 3:18CV03-HEH HAROLD W.CLARK,et al. Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION (Dismissing Action Without Prejudice) Plaintiff, a Virginia inmate proceeding pro se and informa pauperis, filed this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. In order 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). In his current complaint. Plaintiff failed to provide each defendant with fair notice of the facts and legal basis upon which his or her liability rests. Accordingly, by Memorandum Order entered on July 2, 2018, the Court directed Plaintiff to submit a particularized complaint within fourteen(14)days of the date of entry thereof. The Court warned Plaintiff that the failure to submit the particularized complaint would result in the dismissal of the action. More than fourteen (14)days have elapsed since the entry ofthe July 2, 2018 Memorandum Order. Plaintiff failed to submit a particularized complaint or otherwise Dockets.Justia.com
]]>
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.
