United States District Court, D. South Carolina
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
BRISTOW MARCHANT, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
action has been filed by the Plaintiff, pro se,
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.Plaintiff, who at the time he
filed this action was a pre-trial detainee at the Cherokee
County Detention Center, is currently an inmate with the
South Carolina Department of Corrections
(“SCDC”). Plaintiff alleges in his Complaint that
the Defendants failed to provide him with constitutionally
required medical care while he was housed at the Detention
motion for summary judgment on Plaintiff's claims filed
by the Defendants has previously been denied. See
Order Court Docket No. 55. See also Court Docket No.
52 (Report and Recommendation). The Defendants have now filed
a motion to dismiss this case as moot, arguing that since
Plaintiff has now been transferred to the SCDC, they no
longer have any control over Plaintiff's medical care and
are not capable of providing Plaintiff's requested relief
to be “treated by health care professionals”.
Plaintiff opposes the Defendants' motion, and the
undersigned is constrained to agree with the Plaintiff that
his transfer to the SCDC does not moot this case.
Plaintiff is no longer housed at the Detention Center,
Defendants are correct that they are not responsible for (and
cannot provide) his requested injunctive relief. Slade v.
Hampton Roads Reg'l Jail, 407 F.3d 243, 248-249 (4th
Cir. 2005)[holding that former detainee's request for
injunctive relief was moot]; Taggart v. Oklahoma, 74
Fed.Appx. 880, 882 (10th Cir. 2003)[inmate's claims
concerning his medical needs against prison officials for
injunctive relief were rendered moot by his release];
LaFlame v. Montgomery County Sheriff's
Dep't., 3 Fed.Appx. 346 at * * 1 (6th Cir. Jan. 31,
2003)[same]. Therefore, the undersigned agrees that
Plaintiff's claim for injunctive and/or declaratory
relief in this case should be dismissed. See United
States Parole Commission v. Geraghty, 445 U.S. 388, 397
(1980) [Noting that the issue in controversy must
“exist at the commencement of the litigation . . .
[and] must continue throughout its existence”];
Powell v. McCormack, 395 U.S. 486, 496 (1969)
[“[A] case is moot when the issues presented are no
longer live or the parties lack a legally cognizable interest
in the outcome”].
Plaintiff also seeks monetary damages for the Defendants'
alleged failure to provide him with constitutionally required
medical care. Plaintiff's claims for monetary damages
survive his release from the Detention Center; see
Mawhinney v. Henderson, 542 F.2d 1, 2 (2d Cir. 1976);
and as public officials, the named individual Defendants are
subject to suit for damages in their individual capacities in
a § 1983 lawsuit. Will v. Michigan Dep't of
State Police, 491 U.S. 58, 71 (1989); Hafer v.
Melo, 112 S.Ct. 358, 365 (1991); Goodmon v.
Rockefeller, 947 F.2d 1186, 1187 (4th Cir. 1991).
Therefore, the Defendants are not entitled to dismissal of
Plaintiff s claim against them for monetary damages.
on the foregoing, it is recommended that the Defendants'
motion to dismiss this case as moot be
parties are referred to the Notice Page attached hereto.
of Right to File Objections to Report and
parties are advised that they may file specific written
objections to this Report and Recommendation with the
District Judge. Objections must specifically identify the
portions of the Report and Recommendation to which objections
are made and the basis for such objections. “[I]n the
absence of a timely filed objection, a district court need
not conduct a de novo review, but instead must ‘only
satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of
the record in order to accept the recommendation.'”
Diamond v. Colonial Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 416
F.3d 310 (4th Cir. 2005) (quoting Fed.R.Civ.P. 72
advisory committee's note).
written objections must be filed within fourteen (14) days of
the date of service of this Report and Recommendation. 28
U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b); see
Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(a), (d). Filing by mail pursuant to Federal
Rule of Civil Procedure 5 may be accomplished by mailing
Robin L. Blume, Clerk
United States District ...