Abel v. Bank of Winona et al

Filing 15

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 12 ; Denying 2 informa pauperis; and dismissing action. Signed by District Judge Debra M. Brown on 6/28/16. (tab)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
GREENVILLE DIVISION
REBECCA WINDRICK ABEL
V.

PLAINTIFF
NO. 4:16-CV-00068-DMB-JMV

BANK OF WINONA;
J. LANE GREENLEE

DEFENDANTS

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
On June 8, 2016, United States Magistrate Judge Jane M. Virden issued a Report and
Recommendation recommending that Rebecca Windrick Abel’s motion to proceed in forma
pauperis, Doc. #2, be denied, and that this action be dismissed without prejudice. Doc. #12 at
11. On June 22, 2016, Abel filed a “Validation Letter,” which this Court liberally construes as
an objection to the report and recommendation.
Where objections to a report and recommendation have been filed, a court must conduct a
“de novo review of those portions of the ... report and recommendation to which the Defendants
specifically raised objections. With respect to those portions of the report and recommendation to
which no objections were raised, the Court need only satisfy itself that there is no plain error on
the face of the record.” Gauthier v. Union Pac. R.R. Co., 644 F.Supp.2d 824, 828 (E.D. Tex.
2009) (citing Douglass v. United Serv. Auto. Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1428–29 (5th Cir. 1996)).
Abel’s “Validation Letter,” in essence, argues that Judge Virden (and ostensibly this
Court) lacks jurisdiction over Abel because the Court’s flag is adorned with a gold fringe, in
violation of United States and divine law. This argument was considered by United States
District Judge Dean Whipple of the Western District of Missouri who, after noting that “Courts
have labeled the position as ‘frivolous’, ‘totally frivolous’, ‘preposterous,’ and ‘a really

unintelligible assertion,’” elected to examine the law of the flag “in the interest of killing this
argument for good.” McCann v. Greenway, 952 F.Supp. 647, 651 (W.D. Mo. 1997) (internal
alterations and footnotes omitted). Judge Whipple, after considering statutes, Army regulations,
an executive order, and an opinion of the United States Attorney General, concluded that
“[j]urisdiction is a matter of law, statute, and constitution, not a child’s game wherein one’s
power is magnified or diminished by the display of some magic talisman.” Id. at 651.
Adopting the reasoning of Judge Whipple’s opinion in McCann, this Court
OVERRULES Abel’s objections [14] to the report and recommendation.
Additionally, having reviewed the report and recommendation for clear error and found
none, the Court ADOPTS Judge Virden’s report and recommendation [12] as the order of this
Court.1 Accordingly, Abel’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis [2] is DENIED and this action
is DISMISSED without prejudice.
Finally, Abel’s motion titled, “Order Denying Debtor’s Motion for Sanctions, Motion for
Change of Venue and Motion to Recuse” [5], which appears to seek dismissal and transfer of a
Montgomery County Justice Court case, is DENIED because Abel has not shown any grounds
for the requested relief.
SO ORDERED, this 28th day of June, 2016.

/s/ Debra M. Brown
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

1

De novo review by this Court of Judge Virden’s conclusions would produce the same result.

2