Dorsey v. Anthony Clark, et al (INMATE2)

Filing 3

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS that Plaintiff's claims against Judge McCalma and the Municipal Court for Andalusia, AL be Dismissed under the provisions of 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) ; that defendants McCalma and the Municipal Court of Andalusia, AL be Dismissed as parties to the complaint ; that this case be referred back to the undersigned for additional proceedings ; Objections to R&R due by 1/26/2006. Signed by Judge Charles S. Coody on 1/13/2006. (ag, )

Dorsey v. Anthony Clark, et al (INMATE2)

Doc. 3

Case 2:05-cv-01239-MEF-CSC

Document 3

Filed 01/13/2006

Page 1 of 4

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT F O R THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA N O R T H E R N DIVISION __________________________________ J O E MITCHELL DORSEY P l a in tif f , v. M U N I C IP A L COURT A N D A L U S IA , et al., * * * CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:050CV-1239-F (WO) * * D e f e n d a n ts . __________________________________ R E C O M M E N D A T I O N OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE P la in tif f , an inmate incarcerated in the Covington County Jail located in Andalusia, A l a b a m a , filed this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action on December 30, 2005. He states that on D e c e m b e r 13, 2005 the Municipal Court of Andalusia, Alabama, sentenced him to six m o n th s in the Covington County jail for third degree domestic violence. Less than two weeks in to his stay at the county jail, Plaintiff asserts that he fell face first onto and/or through a s ta ir rail which resulted in a back injury. Since his return from the hospital, Plaintiff c o m p la in s that he has been denied adequate medical care for continuing back pain. Plaintiff f ile s this action for damages against the Municipal Court of Andalusia, Alabama, Judge M c C a lm a , Sheriff Anthony Clark, and Annett King. Upon review of the pleadings, the court concludes that dismissal of Plaintiff's claims a g a in s t the Municipal Court of Andalusia and Judge McCalma is appropriate under 28 U.S.C.

Dockets.Justia.com

Case 2:05-cv-01239-MEF-CSC

Document 3

Filed 01/13/2006

Page 2 of 4

§ 1915(e)(2)(B).1

I . DISCUSSION A . The Municipal Court of Andalusia P la in tif f names the Municipal Court of Andalusia as a defendant. A state court is not a person within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Moity v. Louisiana State Bar Association, 4 1 4 F. Supp. 180, 182 (E.D. La. 1976), aff'd, 537 F.2d 1141 (5 th Cir. 1976). Dismissal of P lain tiff 's complaint against the Municipal Court of Andalusia is, therefore, appropriate u n d er 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(I).

B . Judge McCalma To the extent the conduct about which Plaintiff complains with respect to Judge M c C a lm a emanate from judicial actions taken by him in his capacity as a judge for the M u n icip a l Court of Andalusia, he is due to be dismissed. The law is well-settled that state ju d g e s are absolutely immune from damages liability when sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for a c tio n s taken in the course of their judicial duties. Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349 (1978); P a ise y v. Vitale in and for Broward County, 807 F.2d 889 (11 th Cir. 1986). Thus, Plaintiff's

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).

1

2

Case 2:05-cv-01239-MEF-CSC

Document 3

Filed 01/13/2006

Page 3 of 4

r e q u e s t for damages against Judge McCalma is "based on an indisputably meritless legal th e o ry" and is, therefore, subject to dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). Neitzke v . Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 327 (1989).

I I . CONCLUSION A c c o rd in g ly, it is the RECOMMENDATION of the Magistrate Judge that: 1 . Plaintiff's claims against Judge McCalma and the Municipal Court for Andalusia, A laba m a, be DISMISSED under the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i); 2 . Defendants McCalma and the Municipal Court for Andalusia, Alabama, be D IS M IS S E D as parties to the complaint; and 3 . This case be referred back to the undersigned for additional proceedings. It is further O R D E R E D that the parties are DIRECTED to file any objections to the said R e c o m m e n d a ti o n on or before January 26, 2006. Any objections filed must specifically id e n tif y the findings in the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation objected to. Frivolous, co n clus ive or general objections will not be considered by the District Court. The parties are a d v is e d that this Recommendation is not a final order of the court and, therefore, it is not a p p e a la b le . F a ilu re to file written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations in the M a g is tra te Judge's report shall bar the party from a de novo determination by the District

3

Case 2:05-cv-01239-MEF-CSC

Document 3

Filed 01/13/2006

Page 4 of 4

C o u rt of issues covered in the report and shall bar the party from attacking on appeal factual f in d in g s in the report accepted or adopted by the District Court except upon grounds of plain e rr o r or manifest injustice. Nettles v. Wainwright, 677 F.2d 404 (5 th Cir. 1982). See Stein v . Reynolds Securities, Inc., 667 F.2d 33 (11 th Cir. 1982). See also Bonner v. City of P r ic h a r d , 661 F.2d 1206 (11 th Cir. 1981, en banc), adopting as binding precedent all of the d e c is io n s of the former Fifth Circuit handed down prior to the close of business on S e p te m b e r 30, 1981. D o n e this 13 th day of January, 2006.

/s/Charles S. Coody CHARLES S. COODY C H IE F UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

4