Manes v. Cristello et al

Filing 8

Judge Michael A. Ponsor: ENDORSED ORDER entered adopting 5 Report and Recommendations. Upon de novo review, this recommendation is hereby adopted based on its obvious merits, and the absence of any objection. The complaint is hereby ordered dismissed. This case may now be closed. (Lindsay, Maurice)

Case 3: 17-cv-30105-MAP Document 5 Filed 10/03/17 Page 1 of 8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
MANES PIERRE,
Plaintiff,

v.

CIVIL ACTION NO. 17-30105-KAR

MICHELLE A. CRISTELLO, RENEE KHAN,
HON. EDWARD DONNELLY JR., and
HON. THERESA J. BISENIUS
Defendants.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
ROBERTSON, M.J.

For the reasons stated below, the Court will allow the motion to proceed informa pauperis
and recommend that the action be dismissed.
Background

Prose plaintiff Manes Pierre filed a self-prepared complaint against two state court judges,
the Commissioner of the Department of Revenue and a Massachusetts Department of Revenue
Counsel. Plaintiff claims that defendants deprived plaintiff of his constitutional rights, apparently
in two proceedings in the Massachusetts state courts relating to his child support obligations and
divorce. Plaintiff alleges that the Courts and agencies of the Commonwealth are motivated "by
the need to increase the court revenue by denying plaintiff access to justice" and that plaintiff was
"deprived of his constitutional rights for the monetary benefit of the defendants." Citing to a 2013
Boston Globe article about judicial pay raises generally, plaintiff alleges that the Commonwealth's
District and Probate Court judges are somehow corrupt and interested in profiting off of persons
such as plaintiff.
In particular, plaintiff references two state civil actions in which he was or is a party, styled
Department of Revenue et al. v. Pierre, Ml 16-Wl091-WD (the "Paternity Action") and Pierre v.