Baugus v. Haddon et al
Filing
8
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6 in full. Baugus's Complaint 2 is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. This dismissal counts as a strike pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1915(g). Any appeal of this decision would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge Richard F. Cebull on 10/4/2012. Mailed to Baugus. (TAG, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA
BILLINGS DIVISION
JACKSON BRYANT BAUGUS,
CV-12-109-BLG-RFC-CSO
Plaintiff,
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS
AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF
U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE
vs.
SAM E. HADDON, District Court
Judge in his Individual and
Judicial Capacities; THOMAS E.
BOLAND, ESQ., class counselor in
his individual and official
capacities; and VICTORIA L.
FRANCIS, Assistant U.S.
Attorney, in her individual and
official capacities,
Defendants.
Plaintiff Jackson Baugus, a prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil
action alleging Defendants conspired to issue a Writ of Garnishment to collect
fines issued as part of the criminal judgment entered by Judge Haddon in Cause
No. CR-02-133-SEH. United States Magistrate Judge Carolyn Ostby has entered
Findings and Recommendations (doc. 6) with respect to the 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915
and 1915A pre screening of Baugus's Complaint (doc. 2). Magistrate Judge Ostby
1
recommends the Complaint be dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a
cognizable claim. It is further recommended that the dismissal of this action count
as another "strike" against Baugus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(gy and that this
Court certify pursuant to Fed.R.App.P. 24(a)(3)(A) that an appeal of this dismissal
would not be taken in good faith.
Upon service of a magistrate judge's findings and recommendation, a party
has 14 days to file written objections. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). That time has
passed without objection from Baugus. Failure to object to a magistrate judge's
findings and recommendation waives all objections to the findings of fact, Turner
v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1999), but this Court must still review de
novo the magistrate judge's conclusions of law. Barilla v. Ervin, 886 F.2d 1514,
1518 (9th Cir. 1989).
After reviewing the record and applicable law, the only conclusion is that
Magistrate Judge Ostby's Findings and Recommendation are well grounded in law
and fact. Not only are all of Baugus's claims time-barred and issue-precluded, but
Judge Haddon and Ms. Francis are absolutely immune from suit and Mr. Boland
cannot be liable under § 1983 because he is not a state actor.
IThis Court has already assessed one strike against Baugus for filing a frivolous civil
action. Baugus v. Billings Police Dept., 2010 WL 4279407 (D.Mont. Oct. 19, 20 10) affd by
465 Fed.Appx. 690 (9th Cir. 2012).
2
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Ostby's
Findings and Recommendations (doc. 6) are adopted in their entirety: Baugus's
Complaint (doc. 2) is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
The Clerk of Court is directed to:
(1) enter judgment against Baugus pursuant to Rule 58 of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure;
(2) ensure that the docket reflects that this Court certifies pursuant to
Fed.R.App.P. 24(a)(3)(A) that any appeal of this decision would not be taken in
good faith.
(3) ensure that the docket reflects that this dismissal counts as a strike
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g); and
(4)
close this case.
DATED this 4th day of October, 2012.
HARD F. CEBULL
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
3
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?