Meadows v. Maples et al

Filing 13

ORDER ADOPTING 6 RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION as this Court's findings and denying 11 12 Motions to Amend/Correct. An in forma pauperis appeal of this dismissal would be frivolous and not taken in good faith. Signed by Judge Kristine G. Baker on 06/02/2014. (rhm)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS NORTHERN DIVISION TERESE MARIE MEADOWS v. PLAINTIFF Case No. 1:13-cv-00034 KGB-BD JOHN MAPLES, JR., et al. DEFENDANTS ORDER The Court has reviewed the Recommended Disposition submitted by Magistrate Judge Beth Deere (Dkt. No. 6) and the objections filed by plaintiff Terese Marie Meadows (Dkt. No. 9). After carefully considering the objections and making a de novo review of the record in this case, the Court concludes that the Recommended Disposition should be, and hereby is, approved and adopted as this Court’s findings. The Prison Litigation Reform Act (“PLRA”) requires courts to screen a complaint in which a prisoner seeks redress from a governmental entity or an officer of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). Ms. Meadows brings a private suit for damages under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”), 18 U.S.C. § 1961 et seq. The Recommended Disposition recommends that Ms. Meadows’s complaint which purports to allege claims under RICO be dismissed without prejudice. The Court agrees with the Recommended Disposition that Ms. Meadows has failed to allege a viable claim under RICO, and the Court dismisses without prejudice her claims. The Court also has reviewed Ms. Meadows’s motion to amend (Dkt. No. 10) and motions to supplement the record (Dkt. Nos. 11, 12). It appears that Ms. Meadows seeks to supplement her RICO claim and to raise multiple new and unrelated claims that were not asserted in her previous filings. The motions are denied. Ms. Meadows’s proposed amendments do not salvage her RICO claim. As to the new and unrelated claims Ms. Meadows wishes to assert, Ms. Meadows cannot defeat the filing requirements of the PLRA by joining in one lawsuit a multitude of unrelated and legally distinct claims involving different defendants and different time periods. For these reasons, Ms. Meadows’s complaint is dismissed without prejudice. The Court certifies that an in forma pauperis appeal of this dismissal would be frivolous and not taken in good faith. SO ORDERED this the 2nd day of June, 2014. ____________________________________ Kristine G. Baker 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?