[Cite as Gibbs v. Ross Correctional Inst., 2005-Ohio-6281.]
IN THE COURT OF CLAIMS OF OHIO
DERRICK GIBBS
:
Plaintiff
:
v.
:
CASE NO. 2005-07925-AD
:
ENTRY OF DISMISSAL
ROSS CORRECTIONAL INST.
Defendant
:
: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :
{¶ 1} On June 30, 2005, plaintiff filed a complaint against
defendant, Ross Correctional Institution.
Plaintiff alleges on May
4, 2005, his radio was confiscated by defendant as the result of a
conduct report.
Plaintiff asserts when the radio was confiscated
it was damaged by one of defendant’s agents.
confiscation,
plaintiff
was
ordered
to
As a result of the
send
the
radio
home.
Plaintiff seeks damages in the amount of $73.00 for the radio,
postage incurred to send the radio home, and reimbursement of the
$25.00 filing fee which plaintiff submitted on July 8, 2005.
{¶ 2} On September 2, 2005, defendant filed a motion to dismiss.
Defendant asserts plaintiff’s claim should be dismissed pursuant
to Civ.. 12, lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to
state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
Defendant asserts
plaintiff by filing this action is seeking to appeal the decision
of the hearing officer relating to the finding that his radio was
contraband
and
should
be
sent
home.
Furthermore,
defendant
contends plaintiff has no right to assert a claim for contraband
property he has no right to possess.
{¶ 3} On September 14, 2005, plaintiff filed a response to
Case No. 2005-07925-AD
-2-
ENTRY
defendant’s motion to dismiss, however, he did not serve this
motion on defendant and the motion contained no certificate of
service
as
required
by
Civ.
R.
5.
Accordingly,
plaintiff’s
response is stricken.
{¶ 4} Evidence in the claim file reveals plaintiff was found
guilty of a rule 21 violation, disobedience of a direct order by a
hearing officer on May 10, 2005.
The hearing officer ordered the
radio to be sent home at plaintiff’s expense.
the right to appeal this report.
appealed
the
decision
Infraction Board.
of
the
Plaintiff was given
There is no evidence plaintiff
hearing
officer
to
the
Rules
Also, defendant conducted an investigation and
concluded the radio was not damaged prior to being sent home, only
the back cover was missing.
{¶ 5} The basis of plaintiff’s case is an appeal of the decision
rendered
by
the
hearing
officer
with
respect
to
his
radio.
Plaintiff should have sought recourse with an appeal to the Rules
Infraction Board not this court.
plaintiff,
of
his
own
administrative remedies.”
“No redress can be given where
violation,
failed
to
exhaust
his
Foy v. Department of Rehabilitation and
Correction (1985), 85-01732-AD.
Assuming arguendo that plaintiff
appealed to the Rules Infraction Board, such an appeal does not
relate
to
civil
Accordingly,
law.
this
court
Maynard
does
v.
not
Jago
have
decisions of the Rules Infraction Board.
Rehabilitation
and
Correction
(1985),
(1977),
76-0581-AD.
jurisdiction
over
the
Chatman v. Dept. of
84-06323-AD;
Ryan
v.
Chillicothe Institution (1981), 81-05181-AD; Rierson v. Department
of Rehabilitation (1981), 80-00860-AD.
{¶ 6} Having considered all the evidence in the claim file and,
for the reasons set forth above, defendant’s motion to dismiss is
Case No. 2005-07925-AD
GRANTED.
-2-
ENTRY
Plaintiff’s case is DISMISSED.
the court costs of this case.
The court shall absorb
The clerk shall serve upon all
parties notice of this entry of dismissal and its date of entry
upon the journal.
____________________________
DANIEL R. BORCHERT
Deputy Clerk
Entry cc:
Derrick Gibbs, #458-893
P.O. Box 7010
Chillicothe, Ohio 45601
Plaintiff, Pro se
Stephen A. Young, Staff Counsel
Department of Rehabilitation
and Correction
1050 Freeway Drive North
Columbus, Ohio 43229
For Defendant
DRB/laa
10/26
Filed 11/10/05
Sent to S.C. reporter
11/22/05
