Wall v. Wall et al

Filing 40

ORDERED that 39 Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED; that (2) The 10 Motion to Dismiss and the Motion for Judgment on the pleadings are GRANTED and that: (a) plaintiff's claims for declaratory and injunctive relief are DISMISSE D for lack of jurisdiction as further set out; (b) plaintiff's claims for damages against Judges Bush and Reynolds and Special Master/CourtReferee Hiebel are DISMISSED as further set out; (c) plaintiff's claims for damages against defendant s Griffith and Fain -- to the extent they arise from the actions taken by Judge Bush and Special Master/Court Referee Hiebel inplaintiff's divorce action and Judge Reynolds' actions in both the underlying divorce action and in the contempt proceedings conducted in 2005 -- are DISMISSED with prejudice as they are barred by the statute of limitations; and (d) that plaintiff's claims against defendants Griffith and Fain -- to the extent they arise from Judge Reynolds' actions in causing plaintiff to be arrested within the two years preceding the commencement of this action areDISMISSED without prejudice as further set out; and (3) The plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction is DENIED. Signed by Hon. Chief Judge Mark E. Fuller on 9/24/2009. (cb, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT F O R THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA OF N O R T H E R N DIVISION K E N N E T H GENE WALL, P la in tif f , v. A N IT A DENISE WALL d/k/a ANITA D E N IS E GRIFFITH, et al., D e f e n d a n ts. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

C A S E NO. 2:09-cv-527-MEF

ORDER
O n August 28, 2009, the Magistrate Judge filed a Recommendation (Doc. #39) in this c a s e to which no timely objections have been filed. Upon an independent review of the file in this case and upon consideration of the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, it is the O R D E R , JUDGMENT and DECREE of the court that: 1 . The Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED. 2 . The motion to dismiss (Doc. #10) and the motion for judgment on the pleadings (D o c . #30) are GRANTED and that: (a) plaintiff's claims for declaratory and injunctive re lie f are DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction pursuant to the Rooker-Feldman doctrine; (b) p la in tif f 's claims for damages against Judges Bush and Reynolds and Special Master/Court R e f e re e Hiebel are DISMISSED with prejudice pursuant to their absolute judicial immunity; (c ) plaintiff's claims for damages against defendants Griffith and Fain -- to the extent they a rise from the actions taken by Judge Bush and Special Master/Court Referee Hiebel in p la in tif f 's divorce action and Judge Reynolds' actions in both the underlying divorce action

and in the contempt proceedings conducted in 2005 -- are DISMISSED with prejudice as th e y are barred by the statute of limitations; and (d) that plaintiff's claims against defendants G rif f ith and Fain -- to the extent they arise from Judge Reynolds' actions in causing plaintiff to be arrested within the two years preceding the commencement of this action are D IS M IS S E D without prejudice due to plaintiff's failure to allege facts sufficient to support a finding of "state action" on the part of either Griffith or Fain. 3 . The plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction is DENIED. DONE this the 24th day of September, 2009.

/s/ Mark E. Fuller CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE