Bamburg v. Smith County Jail

• Court: District Court, E.D. Texas
• Decided: August 14, 2025
• Docket: 6:24-cv-00423
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS No. 6:24-cv-00423 Samuel Bamburg, Plaintiff, V. Smith County Jail, Defendant.

ORDER Plaintiff Samuel Bamburg, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this civil-rights lawsuit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The case was referred to a magistrate judge. Doc. 16. The magistrate judge issued a report and recommendation that de- fendant Smith County Jail’s motion to dismiss (Doc. 9) pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) be granted. Doc. 16 at 12.. Plaintiff filed objections. Doc. 18. The court reviews the objected-to portions of a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation de novo. Doc. 16 at 4-6; see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The magis- trate judge recommended dismissal of the plaintiff’s claims against Smith County Jail because the jail is not a jural entity that can be sued. See Fed. R. Civ P. 17(b)(3); see also Crull »v. City of New Braunfels, 267 F. App’x 338, 341-42 (5th Cir. 2008) (“There- fore, the Police Department is not a separate legal entity apart from the City and the district court did not err in dismissing the claims against the Police Department.”). The report also recom- mended dismissal on the basis that plaintiff’s claims were barred by the statute of limitations. Doc. 16 at 6-11. Plaintiffs objections to the report reflect a disagreement with the conclusions of the report but fail to establish any error in fact or law. Doc. 18. Plaintiff does not dispute his second amended complaint (Doc. 8) named Smith County Jail as the lone defend- ant or dispute that his claims are time-barred. Jd. ~1~

After reviewing the magistrate judge’s report de novo and be- ing satisfied it contains no error, the court accepts the report’s findings and recommendation. The defendant’s motion to dismiss (Doc. 9) is granted. Plaintiff’s claims are dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim. Any pending motions are denied as moot. So ordered by the court on August 14, 2025.

j! CAMPBELL BARKER United States District Judge

~2~