Opinion
Case No. 8:11-cv-598-T-23TBM.
June 21, 2011
ORDER
DeShields's complaint alleges that the defendants violated his civil rights by Dr. Tirado-Montes' cancellation of DeShields prescribed medication, the absence of which caused inflammation and pain until the medication was restored a month later and after DeShields was rushed to the hospital emergency room. DeShields was granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 5) and he paid the required initial installment toward the filing fee.
The Prisoner Litigation Reform Act requires dismissal of an in forma pauperis prisoner's case "if the allegation of poverty is untrue" or if the case "is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief." 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). Although entitled to a lenient construction, Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519 (1972) (per curiam), service on some of the defendants is not warranted.
In addition to Dr. Tirado-Montes, DeShields also names the Hardee Correctional Institution, the Florida Department of Corrections, and the State of Florida as defendants. Neither the Hardee Correctional Institution nor the Florida Department of Corrections is an entity subject to suit in its own name. Instead, each is a component of the State of Florida. But the Eleventh Amendment protects the State of Florida from suit in federal court for monetary damages. Will v. Michigan Dep't. of State Police, 491 U.S. 58 (1989); Quern v. Jordan, 440 U.S. 332 (1979). Consequently, DeShields cannot pursue a claim for monetary damages, which is the relief he requests, against either the Hardee Correctional Institution, the Florida Department of Corrections, or the State of Florida.
Accordingly, the Hardee Correctional Institution, the Florida Department of Corrections, and the State of Florida are DISMISSED from this case. DeShields may pursue his claim only against Dr. Tirado-Montes.
ORDERED in Tampa, Florida.