Opinion
No. 3:12-0644
06-29-2012
CLINTON L. WYATT Plaintiff, v. LT. DOUGLASS, et al. Defendants.
Judge Trauger
MEMORANDUM
The plaintiff, proceeding pro se, is an inmate at the Metro Davidson County Detention Facility in Nashville. He brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Lt. Douglass, a corrections officer at the jail; the Corrections Corporation of America; and two other members of the jail's staff.
The plaintiff claims that, on June 7, 2012, Lt. Douglass sexually assaulted him during a "pat down". He seeks damages and asks that Lt. Douglass be relieved of his duties and charged with sexual assault.
This action is being brought against the defendants in their official capacities only. Because the plaintiff in an official capacity action seeks damages not from the individually named defendant but from the entity for which the defendant is an agent, Pusey v. City of Youngstown, 11 F.3d 652,657 (6th Cir.1993), "an official capacity suit is, in all respects other than name, to be treated as a suit against the entity." Kentucky v. Graham, 473 U.S. 159,166 (1985). In essence, then, the plaintiff's claims are against Davidson County, the municipal entity responsible for the operation of the Metro Davidson County Detention Facility. Hafer v. Melo, 502 U.S. 21,25 (1991).
A claim of governmental liability requires a showing that the misconduct complained of came about pursuant to a policy, statement, regulation, decision or custom promulgated by Davidson County or its agent, the Corrections Corporation of America. Monell v. New York City Department of Social Services, 98 S.Ct. 2018 (1978). In short, for Davidson County to be liable under § 1983, there must be a direct causal link between an official policy or custom and the alleged constitutional violation. City of Canton v. Harris, 109 S.Ct. 1197 (1989).
The plaintiff has offered nothing to suggest that his rights were violated pursuant to a policy or regulation of Davidson County or its agent, the Corrections Corporation of America. Consequently, the plaintiff has failed to state a claim against the defendants acting in their official capacities.
In the absence of an actionable claim, the Court is obliged to dismiss the complaint sua sponte. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).
An appropriate order will be entered.
______________________
Aleta A. Trauger
United States District Judge