Overton v. Veterans Affairs Medical Center, No. 7:2019cv00267 - Document 11 (W.D. Va. 2019)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Senior Judge Jackson L. Kiser on 5/28/2019. (slt)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
CLERK' S OFFICE U.s.DISm COURT ATQANVILLE,VA FILED IN TH E UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FO R TH E W E STER N D ISTR ICT O F VIR G IN IA R O A N O K E D IW SIO N MAt 2 3 2212 JULA I DUDLEY ERK sv:y-DEPUW CL K H ERBER T O V ERTO N,AR ., Plaintiff, V. CA SE N O .7:19CV 00267 M EM O M ND U M O PIN IO N V ETER AN S A FFA IR S M E DICA L CEN TER,R O A N O K E V IR G IN IA , By: H on.Jaclkson L .K iser Senior U nited StatesD istrictJudge D efendant. PlaintiffHerbertOverton,Jr.,a Virginia inmate proceeding pro K ,filed this civilrights action ptlrsuantto Bivensv.Six UnknownN nmed AcentsofFed.Btlreau ofNarcotics,403 U.S. 388(1971),withjurisdictionvestedunder28U.S.C.5 1331.1concludethatOverton'scomplaint failsto stateany claim actionable underBivensandmustbesummarily dism issed.l Overton alleges that he was Ctsexually assaulted and assaulted'' by six people who çdsqueezled his)but'tand ...putEhimqin restraintsforno apparentreasonp''whilethey falsely claimedthathehadassaulted someone.(Compl.2 (ECFNo.1q.)TheonlydefendantthatOverton namesisthettvetermhsAffairsMedicalCenter''inRoanoke,Virginia. In Bivens,theSuprem eCourtrecognized thatfederalcourtshaveauthorityunder28U .S.C. j 1331to award monetary dnmagesto persons who prove deprivation ofconstitutionalrights through the conduct ofindividual,federalofficials.403 U.S.at 392.As there is no veterans' Overton v. Veterans Affairs Medical Center Doc. 11 hospitalin Roanoke,Iwillassum ethatOverton intendsto suethem edicalcenteroperated by the Departm entofVeteransAffairsin Salem ,Virginia.A m edicalcenter,however,doesnotqualify 1 A complaintfiled by an inmate against$ta governmentalentity''may be dismissed under 28 U.S.C. j1915A(b)(1)ifthecomplaintisttgivolous,maliciousorfailstostateaclaim uponwhichreliefmaybegranted.'' Dockets.Justia.com asproperdefendantin aBivensaction,becauseitisnotafederalofscial.See,e.c.,FDIC v.M ever, 510U.S.471,484-86(1994)(holdingthataBivensactionisunavailableagainstfederalagencies). W hilethecourtsom etimesallow sproqlitigantstonm end acom plaintifitappearsto state apossible,viableclaim againstsomeone,Ido notfind thatoption warrantedin thiscase.Because Bivensactionsdonothavean expresslimitperiod,claimsfiledpursuantto Bivensaresubjectto theanalogousstate statute oflimitations.Blanck v.McKeen,707F.2d 817,819 (4th Cir.1983). Ovelon'sallegationsconcern conductthatoccurred in Virginia.Accordingly,hisBivens claim s aboutthatconductm ustbebroughtçswithintwoyearsafterthecauseofactionaccrues,''asrequired bytheVirginiaCode.Va.CodeAnn.j8.01-243(A).Recordsinthiscotu. tindicatethatOverton's claimsarisefrom alleged eventsatthemedicalcenterthatoccurred in October2010.SeeOverton v.VeteransAffairs M edicalCenter.Roanoke Vircinia,7:18CV00114 (W .D.Va.2018)(see complaint, first page); Overton v. Veterans Affairs M edical Center, Roanoke Vircinia, 7:18CV00437 (W .D.Va.2018)(see complaint,fourth page).Overton iscurrently confined ata federalprisoninMissouriandhasbeenforwelloverayear.Beforethat,V wasconfinedatthe federalmedicalcenter in Butner,North Carolina,for som e time,as reflected by other claim s initially raised in the complaintin thiscase.zBecauseInm satisfiedthatOverton'sclaim sagainst anyonefrom them edicalcenterin Salem arenow barred by the applicable statuteoflimitations,l declineto allow him to filean amended complaintin thisaction. 2 By previousorder,1severed Overton'sclaimsagainstindividualsatButnerand transferred them to theUnited StatesDistrictCourtfortheEastern DistrictofN orth Carolina. 2 Forthe stated reasons,lfind itappropriate to dismiss this action withoutprejudice, ptlrsuanttoj 1915A(b)(1),asfrivolous.Anappropriateorderwillenterthisday.Dismissalwithout prejudiceleavesOvertonfreetorefilehisclaimsinanew andseparatecivilactionifhecancorrect the deficienciesdescribed herein. TheClerk isdirected to send copiesofthism em orandmn opinion andaccompanyingorder to plaintiff. Ex-rEltlothisX' RdayofMay,2019. 2 A:C e 1 & SE 1OR U N ITED STA TES D ISTRICT JU D GE
]]>
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.
