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, )

Download PDF
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

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?