Coggins v. Town of Jackson's Gap (MAG+)

Filing 9

ORDER construing 8 Motion for the Illegal Form, Denying Guaranteed "Due Process of Law" as an Objection to the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation; it is ORDERED as follows: 1) Mr. Coggins's 8 Objection is OVERRULED; 2) The 5 Recommendation is ADOPTED; 3) Mr. Coggins's claims arising from his incarceration and the City's failure to take action to protect Mr. Coggins's property are DISMISSED with prejudice pursuant to 28 USC 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) and (ii), as the y are frivolous, malicious, and barred by res judicata; 4) Mr. Coggins's additional claims relating to the recent theft of property and the City's annexation of property are DISMISSED without prejudice pursuant to 28 USC 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; An appropriate judgment will be entered. Signed by Honorable William Keith Watkins on 1/27/2009. (wcl, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT F O R THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA EASTERN DIVISION G E N E COGGINS, P l a in tif f , v. T O W N OF JACKSON'S GAP, D e f e n d a n t. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) OR DER O n December 12, 2008, the Magistrate Judge filed a Recommendation in this case. (D o c . # 5.) On December 24, 2008, Plaintiff Gene Coggins ("Mr. Coggins") filed a Motion fo r the Illegal Form, Denying Guaranteed "Due Process of Law" (Doc. # 8), which the court c o n stru e s as an Objection to the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation. Upon an independent a n d de novo review of those portions of the Recommendation to which objection is made, 2 8 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), it is ORDERED as follows: 1. 2. 3. M r. Coggins's Objection (Doc. # 8) is OVERRULED. T h e Recommendation (Doc. # 5) is ADOPTED. M r. Coggins's claims arising from his incarceration and the City's failure to

CASE NO. 3:08-CV-974-WKW (WO)

ta k e action to protect Mr. Coggins's property are DISMISSED with prejudice pursuant to 28 U .S .C . § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) and (ii), as they are frivolous, malicious, and barred by res ju d ica ta .

4.

M r. Coggins's additional claims relating to the recent theft of property and the

C ity's annexation of property are DISMISSED without prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. A n appropriate judgment will be entered. D O N E this 27th day of January, 2009. /s/ W. Keith Watkins UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2