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.

Gilmore v. Gilmore

United States District Court, District of South Carolina

November 10, 2014

Tyganda Gilmore, Plaintiff,
v.
Gloria Gilmore, Mother; Nadeed Alston, Aunt; Ward Ed. Wilson; R. Jones from Virginia, Muslim or Blood; C. Mason, Washington, D.C. and M. Crawford, from Washington, D.C., Muslim or Blood, Defendants.

ORDER

Joseph F. Anderson, Jr. United States District Judge

The pro se plaintiff, Tyganda Gilmore, brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 contending that his Aunt, Mother, and other inmates violated his constitutional rights by attempting to have him murdered at the Bureau of Prisons. The Magistrate Judge assigned to this action[1] has construed it as one under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 392 (1971).

The Magistrate Judge has prepared a Report and Recommendation wherein she suggests that the court should dismiss this action for insufficient factual allegations and the fact that private conduct is not actionable in a Bivens action. The Report sets forth in detail the relevant facts and standards of law on this matter, and the court incorporates such without a recitation.

The plaintiff was advised of his right to file objections to the Report and Recommendation, which was entered on the docket on August 27, 2014. The plaintiff filed an objection memorandum which this court has carefully reviewed and finds to be without merit. Accordingly, the objections are overruled.

The Magistrate Judge correctly notes that defendants Gilmore and Alston (plaintiffs Mother and Aunt) are private citizens and purely private conduct is not actionable in a Bivens action. Likewise, defendants Jones, Mason and Crawford appear to be inmates and do not appear to have the authority to act under color of federal law.

After a careful review of the record, the applicable law, the plaintiffs objections, and the Report and Recommendation, the court finds that the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation is proper and adopts and incorporates it herein by reference. Accordingly, this action is dismissed without prejudice and without issuance and service of process.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


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.