From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Langston v. Lawrence

United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Northern Division
Aug 26, 2008
1:08-CV-00039-WRW (E.D. Ark. Aug. 26, 2008)

Opinion

1:08-CV-00039-WRW.

August 26, 2008


ORDER


Pending is Defendant's Motion to Dismiss party Izard County Jail (Doc. No. 18).

In his original Complaint, Plaintiff named Izard County Jail as a defendant. Suits against any "person" acting under color of state law who subjects a citizen to the deprivation of constitutional rights are authorized by 42 U.S.C. § 1983. However, a "jail" is not recognized as an entity capable of suing and being sued under state law and is, therefore, not a "person" within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 1983. In naming Izard County Jail as a defendant, Plaintiff has not named a "person" amenable to suit within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

See Owens v. Scott County Jail, 328 F.3d 1026, 1027 (8th Cir. 2003) (affirming summary judgment for defendant jail on grounds that county jails are not legal entities amenable to suit); Powell v. Cook County Jail, 814 F. Supp. 757 (N.D. Ill. 1993) (county jail not subject to suit under § 1983); Marsden v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 856 F. Supp. 832, 836 (S.D.N.Y. 1994) ("jail is not an entity that is amendable to suit").

Accordingly, Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Izard County Jail (Doc. No. 18) is GRANTED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Langston v. Lawrence

United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Northern Division
Aug 26, 2008
1:08-CV-00039-WRW (E.D. Ark. Aug. 26, 2008)
Case details for

Langston v. Lawrence

Case Details

Full title:LARRY J. LANGSTON PLAINTIFF v. TATE LAWRENCE, et. al. DEFENDANTS

Court:United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Northern Division

Date published: Aug 26, 2008

Citations

1:08-CV-00039-WRW (E.D. Ark. Aug. 26, 2008)