Glover v. Virginia Tech Police Department et al, No. 7:2022cv00495 - Document 7 (W.D. Va. 2022)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Thomas T. Cullen on 10/5/2022. (Opinion mailed to Pro Se Party via US Mail)(aab)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Glover v. Virginia Tech Police Department et al Case 7:22-cv-00495-TTC-RSB Document 7 Filed 10/05/22 Page 1 of 3 Pageid#: 46 Doc. 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ROANOKE DIVISION KADEEM MARCUS GLOVER, Plaintiff, v. VIRGINIA TECH POLICE DEPARTMENT, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil Action No. 7:22cv00495 MEMORANDUM OPINION By: Hon. Thomas T. Cullen United States District Judge Plaintiff Kadeem Marcus Glover, a Virginia inmate proceeding pro se, filed this civil action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, against the Virginia Tech Police Department and a police officer, as well as the owner and a “supervisor/manager agent” of Top of the Stairs, a bar and restaurant in Blacksburg, Virginia. 1 Glover seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis with this action. Having reviewed Glover’s request and his complaint, the court grants his request to proceed in forma pauperis and concludes that Glover fails to state a cognizable § 1983 claim against the named defendants. Accordingly, the court will dismiss this action without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). In his complaint, Glover alleges that “[t]he ‘Top of the Stairs’ agent, familiar with [Glover’s] frequent presence and patronage unreasonably pursued [him] (without [him] in eluding conduct) [sic]—waited until [Glover’s] back was turn[ed], assaulted [him], and caused damage to [his] table, phone, [and] camera[,] in violation of [Glover’s] Eig[h]th Amendment and Fourth Amendment [rights] against such trespass.” (Compl. at 2 [ECF No. 1].) He also 1 See Top of the Stairs, https://www.topofthestairs.com (last visited Oct. 4, 2022). Dockets.Justia.com Case 7:22-cv-00495-TTC-RSB Document 7 Filed 10/05/22 Page 2 of 3 Pageid#: 47 alleges that “[b]ecause of the assault and property damage, [Glover] was in tears and screaming violation—mere outrage of an instant emotional response—with reckless disregard and deliberate indifference the ‘TOTS’ business agent call[ed] law enforcement to shutter and punish [Glover’s] speech [in] violation against US Constitution First Amendment against restriction and retaliation of speech [sic throughout].” (Id.) As relief, Glover asks for “corrective justice,” declaratory, punitive, compensatory damages, “aggravated damages,” and attorney’s fees. To state a cause of action under § 1983, a plaintiff must allege facts indicating that he has been deprived of rights guaranteed by the Constitution or laws of the United States and that this deprivation resulted from conduct committed by a person acting under color of state law. West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42 (1988). Glover does not allege any facts against or conduct committed by the police officer or the owner of Top of the Stairs. He also does not allege any basis for liability of the police department. Finally, it is clear that the owner and the “supervisor/manager agent” of the restaurant/bar are not persons acting under color of state law. As the only facts alleged in the complaint are against the “supervisor/manager agent” of the restaurant/bar and that unnamed person is not a person acting under color of state law, the court concludes that Glover’s complaint fails to state a cognizable § 1983 claim and, thus, the court will dismiss this action without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). -2- Case 7:22-cv-00495-TTC-RSB Document 7 Filed 10/05/22 Page 3 of 3 Pageid#: 48 The clerk is directed to send copies of this Memorandum Opinion and accompanying Order to Glover. ENTERED this 5th day of October, 2022. /s/ Thomas T. Cullen________________ HON. THOMAS T. CULLEN 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.
