Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-alnd-3_15-cv-02276/USCOURTS-alnd-3_15-cv-02276-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Lauderdale County Circuit Judicial Court
Defendant
State of Alabama
Defendant
Kenneth Wayne Whitson
Plaintiff

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHWESTERN DIVISION

KENNETH WAYNE WHITSON 

Plaintiff,

v.

STATE OF ALABAMA and

LAUDERDALE COUNTY

CIRCUIT JUDICIAL COURT,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 3:15-cv-02276-VEH-JEO

 

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

This matter comes before the court on the objections (docs. 23 and 24) to the

Magistrate Judge’sReport and Recommendation (doc. 21). The court notesthat, while

the Plaintiffsometimes uses the word “fact” in his objections, he is in actuality arguing

that the Magistrate Judge was wrong on the law.1

1

In the Report and Recommendation, the Magistrate Judge wrote: “The plaintiff expressly

states that he has been appointed counsel. It is unclear why the plaintiff argues throughout his

amended complaint that the state court failed to appoint him counsel.” (R&R, doc. 21, at 4 fn.1)

(internal citations to case pleadings omitted). The court notes that the Plaintiff clarified the issue

about his lack of counsel by stating that he had counsel - apparently three different attorneys at

different times (doc. 24 at 2, “his third appointed counsel”), but argues that they were appointed

“only in the ‘verbal’ sense but not in the terms as (physically) as necessary to satisfy amendment

6th of the United States Constitution.” (Doc. 24 at 1-2). The undersigned interprets the Plaintiff’s

pleadings, as so clarified, to allege that he was not appointed Constitutionally adequate counsel in

a timely manner. However, this clarification does not in any way call into question the Magistrate

Judge’s legal analysis.

FILED

 2016 Jun-13 PM 02:04

U.S. DISTRICT COURT

N.D. OF ALABAMA

Case 3:15-cv-02276-VEH-JEO Document 25 Filed 06/13/16 Page 1 of 3
What the Plaintiff fails to understand is that he only named two defendants: the 

State of Alabama and the Lauderdale County Circuit Judicial Court. But, as the

Magistrate Judge correctly found, the Eleventh Amendment deprives this court of

jurisdiction over any claim against a state, including its agencies and departments.

Uberoi v. Supreme Court of Florida, 819 F.3d 1311, 1313 (11th Cir. 2016)(“[The

court nonetheless lacked jurisdiction over that claim because sovereign immunity

independently barsit. EleventhAmendmentsovereignimmunityprohibitsfederal courts

from entertaining suits brought by citizens against a state, including its agencies and

departments.”)(internal citations omitted). Astate court,such asthe Lauderdale County

Circuit Court, is clearly an agency or department of the State of Alabama, and so this

court lacks jurisdiction over claims against it.2

Accordingly, the court, having considered the findings and recommendation, and

having reviewed the entire file, concludes that the magistrate judge’s findings and

recommendation are correct. Accordingly, the findings and recommendation are

ADOPTED as the opinion of the court. It is EXPRESSLY DETERMINED that,

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, all claims of the Plaintiff are hereby DISMISSED

WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

2 Sovereign immunity does not apply where a state waives it or Congress validly abrogates

it, but the Plaintiff does not argue that either of those exceptions applies to his claims.

2

Case 3:15-cv-02276-VEH-JEO Document 25 Filed 06/13/16 Page 2 of 3
DONE and ORDERED this the 13th day of June, 2016.

See attached Notice regarding appeal rights.

 

 VIRGINIA EMERSON HOPKINS

United States District Judge

3

Case 3:15-cv-02276-VEH-JEO Document 25 Filed 06/13/16 Page 3 of 3