Opinion

Holt v. Board of Mayor

  • 421 F. Supp. 363
  • 1976 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13211
Court
District Court, E.D. Tennessee
Filed
Sep 16, 1976
Status
Published
Cited by
1 cases
Authority
More cited than 49.8%

The opinion

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

NEESE, District Judge.

This is a civil rights action for money damages against, inter alia, the defendant Kuhn’s Big K Stores, Incorporated. 42 U.S.C. § 1983 ; 28 U.S.C. § 1343 (3). Such defendant moved for a dismissal as to it on the ground that the plaintiff failed to state a claim against it on which relief can be granted. Rule 12(b)(6), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Such motion is meritorious.

The plaintiff is a Tennessee citizen, and such defendant is a Tennessee corporation. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (a)(1), (c). The plaintiff claims that such defendant is liable to him for the actions of its employee, a certain security guard, on the basis of the doctrine of respondeat superior. No other involvement personally of the corporation is alleged by the plaintiff.

The defendant-department store cannot be held liable solely as a master or principal. If the store were an active participant, it could still not be state action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . Therefore, the plaintiff must look to common law actions for relief against the moving defendant. Draeger v. Grand Central, Inc., C.A.10th *364 (1974), 504 F.2d 142, 146 [7]. For such reason, the plaintiff failed to state a claim herein against Kuhn’s Big K Stores, Incorporated, on which relief can be granted. The latter’s motion hereby is GRANTED, and as to such defendant only this action hereby is

DISMISSED.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.