Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Baylor v. Philadelphia Prison System

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA


August 11, 2010

TROY BAYLOR
v.
PHILADELPHIA PRISON SYSTEM, ET AL.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Ludwig, J.

MEMORANDUM

This is a prisoner civil rights case, 42 U.S.C. § 1983; jurisdiction is federal question, 28 U.S.C. § 1331. The pro se complaint alleges that on September 19, 2009, plaintiff Troy Baylor reported to sick call to receive his medication. Complaint, section II. Defendant Judy Shaw is alleged to have given plaintiff the wrong medication at that time. Id. As a result, plaintiff became ill. Id. Defendants Philadelphia Prison System and Warden Karen Bryant*fn1 move to dismiss plaintiff's claims against them.*fn2 For the following reasons, the motion will be granted.

With respect to the Philadelphia Prison System, it is a municipal agency of the City of Philadelphia and, as such, has no separate existence of its own and is not subject to suit. Griffith v. Philadelphia Prison Systems, 2001 WL 876804, at *1 n.1 (E.D. Pa., filed May 18, 2001), quoting 53 P.S. § 16257 ("all suits growing out of [PPS's] transactions . . .shall be in the name of the City of Philadelphia."). Accordingly, all claims against the Philadelphia Prison System are dismissed.

With respect to defendant Bryant, the complaint does not contain any allegations against her, but merely names her as a defendant. "A defendant in a civil rights action must have personal involvement in the alleged wrongs; liability cannot be predicated solely on the operation of respondeat superior." Rode v. Dellarciprete, 845 F.2d 1195, 1207 (3d Cir. 1195), citing Parratt v. Taylor, 452 U.S. 527, 537 (1981). Thus, the fact that defendant Bryant is employed in a supervisory capacity does not subject her to liability based solely on the actions of others. To state a cognizable claim against Bryant, the complaint must allege facts showing that she participated in violating plaintiff's rights, or directed others to violate them, or that she had actual knowledge of and acquiesced in the violation. Baker v. Monroe Twp., 50 F.3d 1186, 1190-91 (3d Cir. 1995). It does not do so, and therefore, plaintiff's claims against her must be dismissed.

Edmund V. Ludwig, J.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.