Robert Earl King, III v. Redivac Emergency Transportation Service

Summary

This Report and Recommendation addresses Robert Earl King III’s pro se 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against Redivac Emergency Transportation Service. The magistrate judge recommends dismissal with prejudice because Redivac was not alleged to be a state actor and the claims arising from an October 16, 2022 incident were untimely under Louisiana’s applicable one-year prescriptive period.

Holdings

1. The claims against Redivac should be dismissed because King did not allege that the private entity acted under color of state law or conspired with a state actor to violate his constitutional rights.
2. The claims should be dismissed as prescribed because Louisiana's former one-year prescriptive period applied to the October 16, 2022 incident and expired before King filed his complaint on April 24, 2025.
3. The court should not afford King an opportunity to amend because the claims were prescribed and any amendment would be futile.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Redivac Emergency Transportation Service, a private entity, could be held liable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 absent allegations that it acted under color of state law or conspired with state actors.
2. Whether King's § 1983 claims were barred by Louisiana's applicable one-year prescriptive period for tort claims arising before July 1, 2024.
3. Whether the complaint should be dismissed with prejudice as frivolous and for failure to state a claim under the prisoner-screening statutes.

Disposition

other