Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

Ruffins v. Elliot

United States District Court, E.D. Louisiana

December 2, 2014

JARVIS RUFFINS,
v.
LT. JOY ELLIOT, ET. AL. SECTION:

ORDER AND REASONS

IVAN L.R. LEMELLE, District Judge.

Before the Court is pro se Plaintiff Jarvis Ruffin's objection to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation regarding his civil rights claim brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

On May 8, 2014, Plaintiff filed this claim against St. Tammany Parish Jail officials Lieutenant Joy Elliot, Warden Greg Longino, and Captain Miller. (Rec. Doc. No. 1).

Magistrate Judge Knowles recommends this claim be dismissed with prejudice. (Rec. Doc. No. 4). On July 1, 2014, Plaintiff timely filed his objection to the recommendation. (Rec. Doc. No. 7).

For the reasons enumerated below,

Magistrate Judge Knowles's Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED and Plaintiff's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.[1]

Plaintiff's Claims

Plaintiff, a prisoner incarcerated in the St. Tammany Parish Jail, claims Warden Greg Longino and Lieutenant Joy Elliot have improperly denied him participation in the jail's work-release program. He alleges that Lt. Elliot has displayed "nepotism and cronyism" by instead choosing other inmates, despite their jail disciplinary infractions and habitual offender backgrounds. (Rec. Doc. No. 1 at 8-11). He also claims he was told habitual offenders, as he is classified, are only eligible to participate in the program during the final six months of their incarceration. Plaintiff believes he was eligible in 2012, but was denied after his interview in the autumn of 2013. (Rec. Doc. No. 4 at 3).

Plaintiff makes similar claims of nepotism and cronyism in the denial of his request to transfer to a different prison. He alleges he was the recipient of an improper and discriminatory disciplinary infraction ("write-up") for possession of tobacco, which prejudiced both his transfer and his application for work-release. (Rec. Doc. No. 1 at 11).

Finally, Plaintiff passionately alleges that Defendants have failed to follow their published policies in myriad respects: from Lt. Elliot giving preferential treatment to an inmate he claims is her daughter's boyfriend, to the prison administration's failures to comply with his requests for documentation regarding his work release and transfer denials; to general preference for inmates hailing from certain towns and parishes. (See Rec. Doc. No. 1 at 7-12).

Law and Analysis

I. Standard of Review

Title 28 U.S.C. § 1915A requires courts to immediately screen suits where a plaintiff seeks civil redress from a government entity, officer, or employee. ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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