From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Batiste v. Gusman

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA SECTION: R(4)
Nov 20, 2013
CIVIL ACTION NO: 13-96 (E.D. La. Nov. 20, 2013)

Summary

finding "an inmate involved in a prison fight is not a person acting under color of state law as required for liability under § 1983."

Summary of this case from Lloyd v. Ala. Dept. of Corr.

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO: 13-96

11-20-2013

NEVILLE BATISTE v. SHERIFF MARLIN N. GUSMAN, et al.


ORDER AND REASONS

Before the Court is plaintiff Neville Batiste's complaint, the Magistrate Judge's Partial Report and Recommendation, and Batiste's objection to the Partial Report and Recommendation. The Court, having reviewed de novo the petition, the record, the applicable law, the Magistrate Judge's Partial Report and Recommendation, and Batiste's objection to the Partial Report and Recommendation, hereby approves the report and adopts it as its opinion, with the addition of the following discussion.

R. Doc. 1.

R. Doc. 24.

R. Doc. 25.

The Magistrate Judge makes two recommendations. First, she recommends that Batiste's § 1983 claims based on allegations of negligence be dismissed, since it is well established that § 1983 liability must be based on more than mere negligence. See Daniels v. Williams, 474 U.S. 327, 333 (1986). Batiste objects to this recommendation, arguing that his § 1983 claim is based on allegations of deliberate indifference, not negligence. On its face, however, Batiste's complaint alleges both negligence and deliberate indifference as grounds for § 1983 liability. Thus, the Court reads Batiste's complaint as alleging both § 1983 liability based on negligence and § 1983 liability based on deliberate indifference. The Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge that Batiste's § 1983 claims based on allegations of negligence must be dismissed.

Id. at 4.

R. Doc. 1 at 3-4.
--------

The Magistrate Judge's second recommendation is that Batiste's § 1983 claims against defendant Courtney Gardner, a fellow prisoner, be dismissed. Batiste makes no objection to this recommendation.

Accordingly,

Batiste's § 1983 claims arising from the alleged negligence of the defendants are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as frivolous and for otherwise failing to state a claim on which relief may be granted.

Batiste's § 1983 claims against Gardner are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as frivolous and for otherwise failing to state a claim on which relief may be granted.

The matter otherwise remains referred to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings.

New Orleans, Louisiana, this 20th day of November, 2013.

______________________

SARAH S. VANCE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Batiste v. Gusman

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA SECTION: R(4)
Nov 20, 2013
CIVIL ACTION NO: 13-96 (E.D. La. Nov. 20, 2013)

finding "an inmate involved in a prison fight is not a person acting under color of state law as required for liability under § 1983."

Summary of this case from Lloyd v. Ala. Dept. of Corr.
Case details for

Batiste v. Gusman

Case Details

Full title:NEVILLE BATISTE v. SHERIFF MARLIN N. GUSMAN, et al.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA SECTION: R(4)

Date published: Nov 20, 2013

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO: 13-96 (E.D. La. Nov. 20, 2013)

Citing Cases

Solis v. Barber

Thus, the high-security inmate is not a state actor, and Solis's section 1983 claim(s) against him should be…

Smith v. Spinks

The federal courts, however, have consistently held that an inmate, even a trustee inmate, is not a state…