Robinson v. Butler

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

Martin Robinson, CASE NO. 2:21-CV-774 Plaintiff, JUDGE SARAH D. MORRISON Magistrate Judge Kimberly A. Jolson v.

Lonnie Butler, et al.,

Defendants.

ORDER

On March 19, 2021, Magistrate Judge Jolson issued a Report and Recommendation and Order (ECF No. 9) recommending that Defendant Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction (“ODRC”) be dismissed, and that Plaintiff Martin Robinson be permitted to proceed with his claims against the remaining Defendants. Plaintiff objected to the dismissal recommendation on April 1, 2021. (ECF No. 10.) Magistrate Judge Jolson’s Report and Recommendation and Order properly recommends that Plaintiff’s claims against ODRC be dismissed because “ODRC is absolutely immune from suit in this Court by virtue of the Eleventh Amendment to the United States Constitution.” (ECF No. 9, PageID 34) (citing Regents of Univ. of Calif. v. Doe, 519 U.S. 425, 429, 117 S. Ct. 900, 137 L.Ed.2d 55 (1997), Tackett v. Ohio Dep’t of Rehab. & Corr., No. 2:10-cv-979, 2011 WL 5076401 at *3 (S.D. Ohio Oct. 25, 2011) (Frost, J.), and Will v. Mich. Dep’t of State Police, 491 U.S. 58, 70–71 (1989)). Plaintiff’s Objection argues only that R.C. § § 2743.01 and 2743.02 permit this matter to proceed against ODRC. Yet, those statutes are inapplicable, as they address matters before the Court of Claims of Ohio. Thus, Plaintiff’s Objection (ECF No. 10) is OVERRULED. The Report and Recommendation and Order (Doc.

9) is ADOPTED and AFFIRMED. Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction are DISMISSED, but Plaintiff may proceed with his claims against the remaining Defendants. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Sarah D. Morrison SARAH D. MORRISON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE