1. A prisoner who is allowed to proceed in forma pauperis in this court will have his complaint
screened in accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). This screening procedure requires
the court to dismiss a prisoner’s civil action prior to service of process if it determines that the complaint is
frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary damages from
a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i)-(iii).
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
RANDY JOE NICHOLS, #149910,
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:06-CV-615-MEF
ALABAMA DEPT. OF CORRECTIONS, et al., )
RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE
In this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action, Randy Joe Nichols [“Nichols”], a state inmate,
challenges the adequacy of medical treatment provided to him at the Easterling Correctional
Upon review of the complaint, the court concludes that dismissal of the plaintiff's
claims against the Alabama Department of Corrections and Easterling Correctional Facility
prior to service of process is appropriate under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i).
The law is well-settled that state agencies are absolutely immune from suit. Papasan
v. Allain, 478 U.S. 265 (1986). Thus, the plaintiff's claims against the Alabama Department
Case 2:06-cv-00615-MEF-DRB Document 5 Filed 07/17/2006 Page 1 of 3
Nichols v. Alabama Department of Corrections et al (INMATE 2)
Although Neitzke interpreted 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d), the predecessor to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), the
analysis contained therein remains applicable to the present statute.
of Corrections are frivolous as they are "based on an indisputably meritless legal theory."
Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 327 (1989). Additionally, Easterling Correctional
Facility is not a legal entity subject to suit or liability under section