Thomas Jerome Howard, Jr. v. Christop Simmerman, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana dismissed Thomas Jerome Howard, Jr.'s action after screening under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A and reviewing his response to an order to show cause. The court held that the alleged destruction or loss of personal property did not state a cognizable § 1983 claim because an adequate state-law remedy was available, declined supplemental jurisdiction over any state-law claims, and directed entry of final judgment.

Holdings

1. The alleged deprivation or destruction of personal property did not constitute a cognizable § 1983 claim because Plaintiff had an adequate state-law remedy and therefore did not allege a constitutional violation.
2. Because the federal claim was dismissed, the court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over any prospective state-law claims.
3. The action was dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Plaintiff's allegations concerning the destruction or loss of personal property stated a cognizable claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
2. Whether the court should exercise supplemental jurisdiction over prospective state-law claims after dismissal of the federal claim.
3. Whether the action should be dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A for failure to state a claim.

Disposition

dismissed