Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes

CLARENCE WATSON, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. LEROY STYNCHOMBE, SHERIFF, ET AL., ETC., DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES.

PER CURIAM:

Watson sued the Sheriff and Deputy Sheriff of Fulton County, Georgia, under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, seeking damages for the alleged wrongful withholding of personal property taken from him upon his incarceration. He alleged jurisdiction by virtue of 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1343. The district court dismissed his petition on the ground that it was a verbatim copy of a previous petition which had been dismissed for failure to state a civil rights cause of action.

This original dismissal was clearly for lack of § 1983 based jurisdiction and expressly preserved plaintiff's right to litigate his property loss in state court. Defendants' contention that it had res judicata effect is not well taken. Hughes v. United States, 71 U.S. (4 Wall.) 232, 18 L.Ed. 303 (1866); Tyler Gas Service Co. v. Federal Power Commission [101 U.S.App.D.C. 184], 247 F.2d 590 (1957); see Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b).

We vacate and remand to the district court for reconsideration in light of Lynch v. Household Finance Corp., 405 U.S. 538, 92 S.Ct. 1113, 31 L.Ed.2d 424 (1972), which held that there is no distinction between personal liberties and property rights with respect to jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1343(3). See Montana v. Harrelson, 469 F.2d 1091 (5th Cir. 1972).

Vacated and remanded.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

WATSON v. STYNCHOMBE
(Dec 27, 1974)