From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Winston v. Jennies

United States District Court, D. Rhode Island
Jun 7, 2004
C.A. No. 04-203 ML (D.R.I. Jun. 7, 2004)

Opinion

C.A. No. 04-203 ML.

June 7, 2004


REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION


Confined at the Adult Correctional Institutions in Cranston, Rhode Island, plaintiff John F. Winston filed a Complaint allegedly pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff names as a defendants Todd K. Jennies and William D. Lewis, private individuals residing in Providence, Rhode Island

According to the Complaint, Mr. Jennies, plaintiff's former landlord, locked the plaintiff out of his apartment following an altercation between the two. Plaintiff indicates that he pursued this landlord/tenant dispute in the state courts and ultimately prevailed. Plaintiff further indicates that Mr. Jennies "put [Mr.] Lewis up to lie on me." See Complaint at 3. This is the substance of plaintiff's allegations. As relief, plaintiff seeks "both of [Mr. Jennies'] homes, . . . his car, and all of his assets." See Complaint at 3. Plaintiff apparently seeks possession of Mr. Jennies' two homes because plaintiff indicates that he "will need some where to stay when [he] gets out." See Complaint at 3. Plaintiff also would like "to be paid in full 98 grand for [his] pain and suffering." Id.

Section 1915A of Title 28 of the United States Code directs the Court to review prisoner complaints before docketing or soon thereafter to identify cognizable claims or dismiss the Complaint if it fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A; See also 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). Pursuant to this directive, this Court finds that the instant complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted for the following reasons:

(1) Title 42, Section 1983 of the United States Code provides a vehicle to bring claims against persons acting under the color of state law. 42 U.S.C. § 1983; See, e.g., Polk County v. Dodson, 454 U.S. 312, 317-18 (1981). Here, plaintiff asserts claims against private individuals. Thus, his Section 1983 claims against Mr. Jennies and Mr. Lewis should fail.
(2) To the extent plaintiff may be attempting to invoke the diversity jurisdiction of this Court to set forth a claim of state tort law, plaintiff's Complaint should still be dismissed. Diversity jurisdiction requires, inter alia, that the parties be residents of different states. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332. From all indications, plaintiff and both of the defendants are residents of Rhode Island

Accordingly, for the reasons set forth above, I recommend that plaintiff's Complaint be dismissed for a failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Any objection to this report and recommendation must be specific and must be filed with the Clerk of Court within ten days of its receipt. Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b). Failure to file timely, specific objection to this report constitutes waiver of both the right to review by the district court and the right to appeal the district court's decision.United States v. Valencia-Copete, 792 F.2d 4 (1st Cir. 1986) (per curiam); Park Motor Mart, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co., 616 F.2d 603 (1st Cir. 1980).


Summaries of

Winston v. Jennies

United States District Court, D. Rhode Island
Jun 7, 2004
C.A. No. 04-203 ML (D.R.I. Jun. 7, 2004)
Case details for

Winston v. Jennies

Case Details

Full title:JOHN F. WINSTON v. TODD K. JENNIES and WILLIAM D. LEWIS

Court:United States District Court, D. Rhode Island

Date published: Jun 7, 2004

Citations

C.A. No. 04-203 ML (D.R.I. Jun. 7, 2004)