Scott v. Bradford et al

Filing 74

OPINION AND ORDER adopting 73 Report and Recommendation, granting 46 Motion for injunctive relief enjoining plaintiff from future litigation, and issuing injunction. Signed by District Judge Linda V. Parker. (DPer)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
DAVID SCOTT,
Plaintiff,
Case No. 13-12781
Honorable Linda V. Parker

v.

MARILYN BRADFORD, WILLIAM
MOLLISON, CHRISTOPHER CORRIVEAU,
MARTIN BAY, D. BISHOP, C. KOBEL,
L. LACEY, AND T. BRANDERVER,
Defendants.
________________________________/
OPINION AND ORDER (1) ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S
OCTOBER 31, 2014 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION [ECF NO. 73];
(2) GRANTING DEFENDANT MARILYN BRADFORD’S MOTION
FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF ENJOINING PLAINTIFF FROM FUTURE
LITIGATION [ECF NO. 46]; AND (3) ISSUING INJUNCTION
Plaintiff David Scott commenced this civil rights action pursuant to 42
U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1988 against Defendants on June 24, 2013. Plaintiff filed an
amended complaint on December 10, 2013. At this time, Plaintiff’s claims against
all defendants have been dismissed. Pending before the Court, however, is
Defendant Marilyn Bradford’s Motion for Injunctive Relief Enjoining Plaintiff
from Future Litigation, filed March 17, 2014. (ECF No. 46.) This action has been
referred for all pretrial matters to Magistrate Judge David R. Grand.

On October 31, 2014, Magistrate Judge Grand issued a Report and
Recommendation (“R&R”), recommending that this Court grant Defendant
Bradford’s motion and enjoin Plaintiff from filing any new action in the United
States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan without first applying for
and receiving a court order authorizing the filing of such lawsuit. (ECF No. 73.)
Magistrate Judge Grand basis his recommendation on Plaintiff’s history of filing
vexatious, harassing, duplicative, and frivolous lawsuits in this District, as well as
the other State and Federal courts in Michigan, which are summarized in his R&R.
(Id. at 1-3.) At the conclusion of his R&R, Magistrate Judge Grand informs the
parties that they must file any objections to the R&R within fourteen days. (Id. at
5.) He further advises that the “[f]ailure to file specific objections constitutes a
waiver of any further right of appeal.” (Id., citations omitted). No objections were
filed.
The Court has carefully reviewed the R&R and concurs with the conclusions
reached by Magistrate Judge Grand. The relevant factors for determining whether
a pre-filing injunction is appropriate with respect to Plaintiff warrant the issuance
of an injunction. (See id. at 7-12.) The Court therefore adopts Magistrate Judge
Grand’s October 31, 2014 Report and Recommendation.
Accordingly,
2

IT IS ORDERED, that Defendant Marilyn Bradford’s Motion for
Injunctive Relief Enjoining Plaintiff from Future Litigation (ECF No. 46) is
GRANTED;
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that Plaintiff is ENJOINED from filing any
new lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan
without first applying for and receiving a court order from the Chief Judge
authorizing the filing of such lawsuit. Plaintiff shall attach a copy of this
Opinion and Order and the magistrate judge’s October 31, 2014 Report and
Recommendation to his request to file any new action in this Court.
S/ Linda V. Parker
LINDA V. PARKER
U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: November 25, 2014
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was mailed to counsel of
record and/or pro se parties on this date, November 25, 2014, by electronic and/or
U.S. First Class mail.
S/ Richard Loury
Case Manager

3