Galloway v. U.S. Department of Justice et al, No. 4:2016cv01219 - Document 5 (N.D. Ohio 2016)

Court Description: Memorandum of Opinion and Order This action is dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e) and 1915A. The Court further certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1915(a)(3), that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith. Judge Benita Y. Pearson on 7/29/2016. (E,CK)

Download PDF
Galloway v. U.S. Department of Justice et al Doc. 5 PEARSON, J. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION CHARLES LEONARD GALLOWAY, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CASE NO. 4:16CV01219 JUDGE BENITA Y. PEARSON MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER [Resolving ECF No. 1] Pro se Plaintiff Charles Leonard Galloway has filed this civil action against the United States Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Prisons. See ECF No. 1. This action arises from the same allegations Plaintiff has asserted in prior civil rights cases,1 i.e., that he had an aneurysm while incarcerated in a special housing unit in FCI Elkton after he was accused of faking a medical condition at sick call. He seeks relief under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971) and the Federal Tort Claims Act. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§1915(e) and 1915A, a district court is required to dismiss before service any in forma pauperis civil action, and any action in which a prisoner seeks redress from a governmental entity, that the court determines is frivolous or malicious or fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Hill v. Lappin, 630 F.3d 468, 470-71 (6th Cir. 2010). 1 See Galloway v. FCI Elkton Med. Dep’t, Case No. 4:15CV02276 (dismissed); Galloway v. Warden FCI - Elkton, et al., Case No. 4:16CV00572 (partially dismissed); Galloway v. USA, 4:16CV00680 (dismissed). Dockets.Justia.com (4:16CV01219) Plaintiff’s claims under Bivens must be dismissed because such claims can only be asserted against individual federal officials, not the United States or its agencies. See Correctional Serv. Corp. v. Malesko, 534 U.S. 61, 70 (2001). Any tort claim Plaintiff asserts under the Federal Tort Claims Act is duplicative of claims he has already asserted on the same facts in a prior civil rights lawsuit pending in this Court. See Galloway v. Warden FCI - Elkton, et al., Case No. 4:16CV00572 (partially dismissed). Conclusion Accordingly, this action is dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e) and 1915A. The Court further certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1915(a)(3), that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith. IT IS SO ORDERED. July 29, 2016 Date /s/ Benita Y. Pearson Benita Y. Pearson 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.