Walker v. O'Brien

Full title: CHARLES Y. WALKER, Plaintiff, v. RONALD J. O'BRIEN, et al., Defendants

Court: United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Eastern Division

Date published: Aug 28, 2009

Civil Action 2:08-CV-523 (S.D. Ohio Aug. 28, 2009)

Opinion

Civil Action 2:08-CV-523.

August 28, 2009

ORDER

GEORGE SMITH, District Judge

On July 27, 2009, the United States Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that the motion filed by the Department of Rehabilitation and Correction to dismiss the claims asserted against it for lack of jurisdiction, Doc. No. 20, be granted. This matter is now before the Court on plaintiff's objection to the Report and Recommendation, which the Court will consider de novo. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b); F.R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3).

The complaint asserts a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 directly against the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction, a state agency. Doc. No. 4.¹ The Court lacks jurisdiction over the claims asserted against this defendant. See Foulks v. Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction, 713 F.2d 1229 (6^th Cir. 1983). Plaintiff's objection does not address this jurisdictional issue, but addresses the merits of his claim.

1 The complaint also asserts claims against officials of Franklin County, Ohio.

Plaintiff's objection to the Report and Recommendation, Doc. No. 23, is DENIED. The Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED and AFFIRMED. The motion to dismiss, Doc. No. 20, is GRANTED. The defendant state agency is DISMISSED from this action.

The action continues, however, against the defendant county officials.