Mario Payne v. Commonwealth of Kentucky, et al.

Payne · United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky · June 18, 2026 · No. 26-267-DLB

Summary

The court granted Mario Payne's motion to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissed his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint concerning the alleged disclosure of competency-evaluation results during a state-court hearing. The court concluded that the complaint did not state a federal claim, that official-capacity claims were barred by the Eleventh Amendment, that any individual-capacity claim against the prosecutor was barred by absolute prosecutorial immunity, and that the claim was untimely. The action was stricken from the docket.

Holdings

  1. The complaint failed to state a viable § 1983 claim because it appeared to assert only state-law tort claims and did not plausibly allege a violation of federal law.
  2. The Eleventh Amendment barred the damages claim against the Commonwealth of Kentucky and the official-capacity claim against Sanders because an official-capacity claim is effectively a claim against the State.
  3. Even if liberally construed as an individual-capacity claim, Payne's claim against Sanders was barred by absolute prosecutorial, or quasi-judicial, immunity because the challenged conduct occurred during a court hearing and was directly related to the court's determination of Payne's competency.
  4. Any individual-capacity § 1983 claim was barred by Kentucky's one-year statute of limitations because Payne filed suit approximately ten months after the limitations deadline.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Payne stated a viable claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 when his allegations asserted state-law tort claims and did not plausibly allege a violation of federal law.
  2. Whether the Eleventh Amendment barred Payne's damages claim against the Commonwealth of Kentucky and his official-capacity claim against Sanders.
  3. Whether Sanders would be absolutely immune from an individual-capacity damages claim for conduct occurring during a competency hearing and related to the criminal proceeding.
  4. Whether an individual-capacity § 1983 claim based on conduct occurring on August 19, 2024, was barred by Kentucky's one-year statute of limitations.

Disposition

dismissed

Cases Cited (12)

  • Hill v. Lappin, 630 F.3d 468, 470-71 (6th Cir. 2010)(followed)
  • Davis v. Prison Health Services, 679 F.3d 433, 437-38 (6th Cir. 2012)(followed)
  • Ernst v. Rising, 427 F.3d 351, 358 (6th Cir. 2005)(followed)
  • Edelman v. Jordan, 415 U.S. 651, 662-63 (1974)(followed)
  • Lewis v. Clarke, 581 U.S. 155, 162 (2017)(followed)
  • Hopper v. Phil Plummer, 887 F.3d 744, 760 n.4 (6th Cir. 2018)(followed)
  • Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409, 420 (1976)(followed)
  • Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409, 430-31 (1976)(followed)
  • Bonner v. Perry, 564 F.3d 424, 431 (6th Cir. 2009)(followed)
  • Southeast Kentucky Baptist Hospital, Inc. v. Gaylor, 756 S.W.2d 467, 469 (Ky. 1988)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 12.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…