Sartori v. North Carolina Department of Correction, 215 N.C. App. 387 (2011)

Sept. 6, 2011 · North Carolina Court of Appeals · No. COA11-167
215 N.C. App. 387
ROBERT ALLEN SARTORI, Plaintiff v. NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION, ET AL; ROBERT LEWIS, DIRECTOR OF PRISONS; ALVIN KELLER, SECRETARY; DOC CENTRAL MANAGEMENT TEAM, ET AL, Defendants

ROBERT ALLEN SARTORI, Plaintiff v. NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION, ET AL; ROBERT LEWIS, DIRECTOR OF PRISONS; ALVIN KELLER, SECRETARY; DOC CENTRAL MANAGEMENT TEAM, ET AL, Defendants

No. COA11-167

(Filed 6 September 2011)

Prisons and Prisoners — monetary charges — arguments previously decided — dismissal proper

The trial court did not err in dismissing plaintiffs complaint seeking injunctive and declaratory relief for charges by the North Carolina Department of Correction to inmates for disciplinary infractions and medical treatment co-payments. Plaintiffs exact arguments had previously been ruled upon and the Court of Appeals adopted the reasoning of those prior decisions in affirming the trial court’s decision.

Appeal by plaintiff from order entered 22 September 2010 by Judge James L. Baker in Mitchell County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 18 August 2011.

Robert Allen Sartori, pro se.

Attorney General Roy Cooper, by Assistant Attorney General Elizabeth F. Parsons, for defendant-appellees.

STEELMAN, Judge.

On 12 July 2010, Robert Allen Sartori (plaintiff) filed this action against the North Carolina Department of Correction (DOC), Director of Prisons Robert Lewis, Secretary of DOC Alvin Keller, and DOC Central Management Team (collectively, defendants) seeking injunctive and declaratory relief for the charges by DOC to inmates for disciplinary infractions and medical treatment co-payments on the basis that they were invalid due to failure to comply with the provisions of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 12-3.1. The trial court dismissed plaintiff’s action on 22 September 2010 pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure.

Plaintiff appeals.

Plaintiff’s exact arguments have been ruled upon in Griffith v. N.C. Dept. of Corr.,_N.C. App._, 710 S.E.2d 707 (2011) (unpublished) (medical co-payments), and Griffith v. N.C. Dept. of Corr., *388_N.C. App._709 S.E.2d 412 (2011) (disciplinary infractions fee). We adopt the reasoning of these prior decisions and affirm the ruling of the trial court.

AFFIRMED.

Judges CALABRIA and ELMORE concur.