Casper et al v. Claiborne County, Tennessee et al, No. 3:2013cv00411 - Document 10 (E.D. Tenn. 2014)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION to be set forth more fully in the following Order. Signed by Chief District Judge Thomas A Varlan on February 20, 2014. (AYB)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE JAMES CASPER and MARY CATHERINE CASPER, Plaintiffs, v. CLAIBORNE COUNTY, TENNESSEE, SHERIFF DAVID RAY, individually and in his official capacity as a employee of the CLAIBORNE COUNTY SHERIFF S DEPARTMENT, STEVE CLINE, individually and in his official capacity as a employee of the CLAIBORNE COUNTY SHERIFF S DEPARTMENT, Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No.: 3:13-CV-411-TAV-HBG MEMORANDUM OPINION This civil action arises out of the execution of a search warrant and the subsequent arrest and incarceration of plaintiff James Casper [Doc. 1]. Plaintiffs assert claims against defendants under to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and under state law, specifically the Tennessee Governmental Tort Liability Act ( TGTLA ) [Id.]. Before the Court is defendants Motion for Partial Dismissal [Doc. 6]. Pursuant to Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, defendants move the Court to decline to exercise jurisdiction over plaintiffs state-law claims and to dismiss plaintiffs official-capacity claims because Claiborne County has been named as a defendant. Plaintiffs did not respond to the motion and the time for doing so has passed. See E.D. Tenn. L.R. 7.1; E.D. Tenn. L.R. 7.2 ( Failure to respond to a motion may be deemed a waiver of any opposition to the relief sought. ). It is undisputed that the Court has federal question jurisdiction over plaintiff s § 1983 claim and that the Court may exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state-law claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1367. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, however, has held that the Tennessee legislature expressed a clear preference that TGTLA claims be handled by its own state courts and that this preference is an exceptional circumstance for declining jurisdiction. Gregory v. Shelby Cnty., Tenn., 220 F.3d 433, 446 (6th Cir. 2000), abrogated on other grounds by Buckhannon Bd. & Care Home, Inc. v. W. Va. Dep t of Health & Human Res., 532 U.S. 598 (2001). For reasons explained in Cass v. Tennessee Valley Authority, Case No. 3:10-cv-307-TAV-CCS [Doc. 49], the Court finds declining to exercise jurisdiction over plaintiffs TGTLA claims in this case is appropriate. The Court also finds it appropriate to dismiss plaintiffs official-capacity claims as redundant. Pursuant to federal law, [a]n official capacity claim filed against a public employee is equivalent to a lawsuit directed against the public entity which that agent represents. Claybrook v. Birchwell, 199 F.3d 350, 355 n.4 (6th Cir. 2000) (citing Kentucky v. Graham, 473 U.S. 159, 165 (1985)). Claiborne County, Tennessee, is a defendant in this action and has thus received notice of the claims against it. 2 Accordingly, for the reasons explained herein, the Court will GRANT defendants Motion for Partial Dismissal [Doc. 6] and DISMISS plaintiff s TGTLA claims as well as the claims against Sheriff David Ray and Steve Cline in their official capacities. ORDER ACCORDINGLY. s/ Thomas A. Varlan CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 3

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.