Freeman Bankston v. Bradley Eckbert, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania adopted a magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation and granted defendants’ motion to dismiss. The court dismissed the plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment claim with prejudice, dismissed the negligence claim without prejudice to refiling in state court, and directed the Clerk to close the case.

Holdings

1. A one-time allegation that prison food may have contained a foreign object did not state a valid Eighth Amendment claim; the claim was dismissed with prejudice.
2. The court declined supplemental jurisdiction over the negligence claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3) and dismissed it without prejudice to refiling in state court.
3. The district court adopted the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation in whole after reviewing it under the applicable reasoned-consideration standard.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the complaint stated an Eighth Amendment claim based on the alleged ingestion of a possible foreign object in prison food.
2. Whether the negligence claim should be dismissed for failure to state a claim or because the court should decline supplemental jurisdiction.
3. Whether the Report and Recommendation should be adopted when no timely and specific objections were filed.

Disposition

dismissed