Patton v. Rushefsky

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS HOT SPRINGS DIVISION

RICHARD R. PATTON PLAINTIFF

v. Civil No. 6:21-cv-06008

ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION; ARKANSAS COMMUNITY OF CORRECTION; DR. BERYL RUSHEFSKY; and DR. ALBERT KITTRELL DEFENDANTS

ORDER Now before the Court is the Report and Recommendation filed February 10, 2021, by the Honorable Barry A. Bryant, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Arkansas. (ECF No. 6.) Plaintiff proceeds in this section 42 U.S.C. §1983 action pro se and in forma pauperis. For purposes of pre-service screening, Judge Bryant finds that Plaintiff has alleged cognizable claims for relief against separate defendants Rushefsky and Kittrell for denying him medication previously prescribed, and Judge Bryant recommends that Plaintiff be allowed to proceed with the claims. Regarding Plaintiff’s claims against the Arkansas Department of Correction (ADC) and the Arkansas Community of Correction (ACC), Judge Bryant recommends dismissal of these claims because the named defendants are agencies of the State of Arkansas and the claims are the equivalent of a suit against the State. Claims against the State are barred by the Eleventh Amendment. See Campbell v. Arkansas Dept. of Correction, 155 F.3d 950 (8th Cir. 1998); Morstad v. Dept. of Corr. & Rehab., 147 F.3d 741 (8th Cir. 1998). No party has filed objections to the Report and Recommendation, and the time to object has passed. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Upon review, the Court adopts the Report and Recommendation in toto. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff’s claims against the ADC and ACC be

DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. It is further ordered that Plaintiff’s claims against Defendants Rushefsky and Kitrell shall remain with the Court and proceed, and these defendants shall be served with the Complaint. IT IS SO ORDERED this 15th day of March 2021.

/s/ ROBERT T. DAWSON SENIOR U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE