Walker v. Thompson et al
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER, denying 38 Second MOTION for Joinder of claims. Signed by Judge Henry R. Wilhoit, Jr on 2/27/12.(SMT)cc: COR, Walker via USMail
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
CIVIL ACTION NO. 10-CV-54-HRW
WILLIAM B. WALKER
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
LADONNA H. THOMPSON, et al.
***** ***** *****
Plaintiff William B. Walker, an inmate at the Eastern Kentucky Correctional
Complex ("EKCC") a state prison in West Liberty, Kentucky,pro se, filed this action,
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, asserting various claims of civil rights violations
against defendants LaDonna H. Thompson, Commissioner of the Kentucky
Department of Corrections; Joseph Meko, Warden at Little Sandy Correctional
Complex ("LSCC"); 1 and Colleen Fanning, a Correctional Officer at LSCC. Walker
seeks injunctive relief and damages. This matter is proceeding on Walker's claims
that (1) defendants' policy of racial segregation in two-man cells violated his
At the time Walker filed his complaint, he was in inmate at LSCC in Little
Sandy, Kentucky. He has since been transferred to EKCC.
Fourteenth Amendment right to equal protection, and (2) the Kentucky Department
of Corrections ("KDOC") has violated federal law by deducting his social security
disability benefits from his inmate account for payment of fines imposed by the
This matter is currently before the Court on Walker's second motion for joinder
of claims. The defendants' response time having expired, this motion is ripe for
Walker's second motion for joinder of claims appears to be based on his claim
that his conviction in Warren Circuit Court in a criminal case in which the presiding
judge was Judge John D. Minton, Jr.,2 is null and void for a host of reasons. On that
premise, Walker argues that his current incarceration is illegal, that the state court's
Order imposing sanctions on him for filing frivolous actions is void, that KDOC
employees wrongfully acted to notify the Social Security Administration of his
incarceration, which resulted in the suspension ofthe payment of his monthly social
security benefits, that prison officials enforcing the policies of Commissioner
Thompson wrongfully applied prison rule CPP 15.2 to him, that defendants allowed
Hon. John D. Minton, Jr., is no longer Warren Circuit Judge and is currently
the Chief Justice on the Kentucky Supreme Court.
themselves to become tools ofa disqualified judge in Warren Circuit Court (Judge
Minton), and that the federal court is not required to give full faith and credit to that
void state court judgment.
Walker apparently misunderstands the role ofthis Court. To the extent that he
wishes to challenge the Boyle Circuit Court's Orders of October 4,2010, and May
24,2011, both of which imposed a $1,000.00 fine and directed the Clerk ofthe Court
to accept no more filings from him until the fine had been paid, or any other state
court judgment or order, he is advised that his request for relief is barred by the
This doctrine, described as "a combination of the
abstention and res judicata doctrines, stands for the proposition that a federal district
court may not hear an appeal of a case already litigated in state court. A party raising
a federal question must appeal a state court decision through the state system and then
directly to the Supreme Court ofthe United States." United States v. Owens, 54 F.3d
271,274 (6th Cir. 1995) (citing District ofColumbia Court ofAppeals v. Feldman,
460 U.S. 462,476 (1983); Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co., 263 U.S. 413 (1923)).
However displeased Walker is with the imposition ofthe $1,000.00 fines or any other
fine imposed by the state courts in Kentucky, his remedy is not to seek relief from a
federal district court. Instead, he must pursue appeals of that decision through
Kentucky's appellate courts - to the level of the Commonwealth's Supreme Courtand then on to the Supreme Court of the United States.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that PlaintiffWilliam B. Walker's
second motion for joinder of claims [R. 38] is DENIED.
This 27ili day of February, 2012.
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?