From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jackson v. Palmetto Baptist Hospital

United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Columbia Division
Nov 17, 2005
C/A No. 3:05-1901-CMC-BM (D.S.C. Nov. 17, 2005)

Summary

finding hospital was not a person under § 1983

Summary of this case from Wilson v. Spartanburg Cnty. Reg'l Hosp.

Opinion

C/A No. 3:05-1901-CMC-BM.

November 17, 2005


OPINION AND ORDER


Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed this action presumably under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaining about the treatment she received when she was admitted to the psychiatric wing of Defendant Palmetto Baptist Hospital and administered sedatives without her permission. Defendant filed a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. The court advised Plaintiff of the importance of filing a response to the motion and explained the procedures for doing so. The court further advised Plaintiff that if she failed to respond adequately, Defendant's motion may be granted, thereby ending the case.

In accordance with the court's order of reference, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), and Local Rule 73.02 (B)(2)(b), (d), and (e), DSC, this matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Bristow Marchant for pre-trial proceedings and a Report and Recommendation on any pending dispositive matters.

In his Report, the Magistrate Judge recommended that Defendant's motion to dismiss be granted, and that Plaintiff's claims asserted under § 1983 be dismissed, without prejudice. The Magistrate Judge further recommended that any remaining state law claims which Plaintiff has or may have intended to assert in this action also be dismissed, without prejudice.

The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this court. The recommendation has no presumptive weight, and the responsibility to make a final determination remains with the court. See Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261 (1976). The court is charged with making a de novo determination of any portion of the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge to which a specific objection is made. The court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendation made by the Magistrate Judge or recommit the matter to the Magistrate Judge with instructions. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b).

The Magistrate Judge advised Plaintiff of the procedures and requirements for filing objections to the Report and Recommendation and the serious consequences if she failed to do so. Plaintiff has filed objections.

The court has carefully reviewed Plaintiff's response to the Report and Recommendation and has concluded that Plaintiff's objections lack merit. After considering the motion, the objections, the record of this matter, the applicable law, and the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, the court agrees with the conclusions of the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, the court adopts and incorporates the Report and Recommendation by reference in this Order.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendant's motion to dismiss is granted; and that this action is dismissed, without prejudice.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any remaining state law claims which Plaintiff has or may have intended to assert in this action also are dismissed, without prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Jackson v. Palmetto Baptist Hospital

United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Columbia Division
Nov 17, 2005
C/A No. 3:05-1901-CMC-BM (D.S.C. Nov. 17, 2005)

finding hospital was not a person under § 1983

Summary of this case from Wilson v. Spartanburg Cnty. Reg'l Hosp.

dismissing Palmetto Baptist Hospital as a defendant because it was not a person subject to suit under § 1983

Summary of this case from Smith v. Nelson

dismissing Palmetto Baptist Hospital as a defendant because it was not a person withing the meaning of § 1983

Summary of this case from Vanzant v. Carolina Ctr. for Occupational Health
Case details for

Jackson v. Palmetto Baptist Hospital

Case Details

Full title:Iris G. Jackson, Plaintiff, v. Palmetto Baptist Hosptial, Defendant

Court:United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Columbia Division

Date published: Nov 17, 2005

Citations

C/A No. 3:05-1901-CMC-BM (D.S.C. Nov. 17, 2005)

Citing Cases

Wilson v. Spartanburg Cnty. Reg'l Hosp.

Only a "person" can be liable under § 1983, and neither the Jail nor the Medical Center is a person. Miller…

Vanzant v. Carolina Ctr. for Occupational Health

See, e.g., Preval v. Reno, 203 F.3d 821, 2000 WL 20591, at *1 (4th Cir. 2000) (unpublished table decision)…