Masi v. Glynn County Detention Center
Filing
14
ORDER ADOPTING 12 Report and Recommendations of the Magistrate Judge as the opinion of the Court. The Court OVERRULES Masi's Objections, DISMISSES Plaintiff's Complaint, and DIRECTS the Clerk to enter the appropriate judgment of dismissal and to CLOSE this case. The Court DENIES Plaintiff leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. Signed by Chief Judge Lisa G. Wood on 3/10/2017. (ca)
J^tl tlfie Untteli States: Btsitrict Court
Jfor tlie ^outl^em Btsitnct of (fleorsta
Prunfiitoick Btbtsiton
FILED
Scott L. Poff, Clerk
United States District Court
By casbell at 11:33 am, Mar 10, 2017
JAMES MASI,
Plaintiff,
CIVIL ACTION NO.: 2:17-cv-l
V.
GLYNN COUNTY DETENTION CENTER,
*
*
Defendant.
*
ORDER
Presently before the Court is Plaintiff James Masi's
C^Masi") Objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report and
Recommendation dated February 8, 2017.^
Dkt. No. 13.
In his
Objections, Masi objects to the Magistrate Judge's
Recommendation that this Court dismiss his Complaint for failure
Although Masi's pleading is docketed as a ^^letter" to the Court, a
review of that pleading reveals that he is objecting to the Magistrate
Judge's recommendation that that Court dismiss his Complaint. Dkt.
No. 13. ''^Federal courts sometimes will ignore the legal label that a
pro se litigant attaches to a motion and recharacterize the motion in
order to place it within a different legal category." Retic v. United
States, 215 F. App'x 962, 964 (11th Cir. 2007) (quoting Castro v.
United States, 540 U.S. 375, 381 (2003)). Federal courts ^^may do so
in order to avoid an unnecessary dismissal, to avoid inappropriately
stringent application of formal labeling requirements, or to create a
better correspondence between the substance of a pro se motion's claim
and its underlying legal basis." Id. (quoting Castro, 540 U.S. at
381-82). Accordingly, Masi's letter is properly classified as an
Objection to the Report and Recommendation.
to follow the Court's Order to amend his Complaint and for
failure to state a claim.
Id. at p. 1.
Plaintiff asserts that
he amended his Complaint, as ordered by the Court, but failed to
submit his Amended Complaint via certified mail.
p. 1.
Dkt. No. 13,
Plaintiff appears to argue, in the alternative, that he
was unable to amend his Complaint because jail staff refused to
provide him paper or envelopes.
Id.
The Court OVERRULES Masi's Objections.
Plaintiff's
submission of seven letters to the Court, dkt nos. 4, 5, 7, 8,
9, 10, 11, following the Court's Order directing Plaintiff to
amend his Complaint, dkt. no. 3, belies his contention that he
was prevented from timely filing an amendment to his Complaint.
Accordingly, after an independent and de novo review of the
entire record, the Court CONCURS with and ADOPTS the Magistrate
Judge's Report and Recommendation, dkt. no. 12, as the opinion
of the Court, DISMISSES Plaintiff's Complaint, and DIRECTS the
Clerk of Court to enter the appropriate judgment of dismissal
and to CLOSE this case.
The Court DENIES Plaintiff leave to
appeal in forma pauperis on appeal.
SO ORDERED, this
day
_, 2017.
LI;5A GODBEY WOOD, CHIEF JUDGE
[ITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
'SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
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?