Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-arwd-2_06-cv-02064/USCOURTS-arwd-2_06-cv-02064-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

AO72A

(Rev. 8/82)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

FORT SMITH DIVISION

CHRISTOPHER ALAN ANDREWS PLAINTIFF

v. Civil No. 06-2064

SEBASTIAN COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE,

SEBASTIAN COUNTY DETENTION CENTER,

DR. TOM TINSMAN, NURSE CRYSTAL REED,

MIKE CONGER, SGT. RITTER, and SGT. TAULBEE DEFENDANTS

MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Christopher Alan Andrews brings this pro se civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983,

alleging that his constitutional rights were violated while detained in the Sebastian County

Detention Center. The defendants have filed a motion to dismiss (Doc. 13) the Sebastian County

Sheriff's Office and the Sebastian County Detention Center as defendants in this action. The

plaintiff has not filed a response to this motion.

In their motion, defendants state that the Sebastian County Detention Center and the

Sebastian County Sheriff's Office are not persons recognized under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and thus

should be dismissed as parties in this action. (Doc. 13.) In the brief in support, defendants

explain that section 1983 authorizes the imposition of liability against "persons" who, acting

under color of state law, subjects a citizen to a deprivation of constitutional rights, and that the

Sebastian County Detention Center and the Sebastian County Sheriff's Office are buildings and

not "persons" amenable to suit under section 1983. 

We agree. The Sebastian County Detention Center and the Sebastian County Sheriff's

Office are not legal entities subject to suit under section 1983. See e.g., Dean v. Barber, 951

F.2d 1210, 1214 (11th Cir. 1992) ("[s]heriff’s departments and police departments are not

Case 2:06-cv-02064-RTD Document 19 Filed 08/28/06 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: <pageID>
AO72A

(Rev. 8/82)

-2-

usually considered legal entities subject to suit"); Powell v. Cook County Jail, 814 F. Supp. 757

(N.D. Ill. 1993) (Jail not subject to suit); Marsden v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 856 F. Supp. 832,

836 (S.D.N.Y.1994) ("jail is not an entity that is amenable to suit"); In re Scott County Master

Docket, 672 F. Supp. 1152, 1163 n. 1 (D. Minn.1987) (sheriff's department is not legal entity

subject to suit), aff'd, Myers v. Scott County, 868 F.2d 1017 (8th Cir.1989). 

Therefore, I recommend that defendants' motion (Doc. 13) to dismiss the Sebastian

CountyDetention Center and the Sebastian County Sheriff's Office as defendants be GRANTED

and these parties be DISMISSED. 

Notably, there are several other defendants named in this action, so the plaintiff will be

able to pursue his claims against these defendants. 

The parties have ten days from receipt of this report and recommendation in which

to file written objections pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The failure to file timely

written objections may result in waiver of the right to appeal questions of fact. The parties

are reminded that objections must be both timely and specific to trigger de novo review by

the district court. 

DATED this 28th day of August 2006.

/s/ Beverly Stites Jones

_________________________________________

HON. BEVERLY STITES JONES 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:06-cv-02064-RTD Document 19 Filed 08/28/06 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: <pageID>