SEVERINO v. BOROUGH OF SOUTH RIVER et al

Filing 6

MEMORANDUM ORDER Granting Application for In Forma Pauperis. The Clerk shall file the complaint. All claims against the South River Municipal Court are dismissed with prejudice. Signed by Judge Michael A. Shipp on 8/10/2015. (kas, )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

WILLIAM F. SEVERINO, III,
Civil Action No. 14-103 (MAS) (TJB)

Plaintiff,

v.
BOROUGH OF SOUTH RIVER, et al.,

MEMORANDUM ORDER ON
APPLICATION TO PROCEED
WITHOUT PREPAYMENT OF FEES

Defendants.
This matter comes before the Court on the application of Plaintiff William F. Severino, III
("Plaintiff') to proceed without prepayment of fees under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. (Application, ECF
No. 5.) Plaintiff brings suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, for violation of his First, Sixth, Eighth, and
Fourteenth Amendment rights, and under N.J.S.A. 10:6-2, for violations of the New Jersey
Constitution, 1 as well as state law claims for fraud and false imprisonment, against the Borough of
South River; South River Municipal Court; and Cassandra Garrick, the court administrator for the
South River Municipal Court ("Defendants"). The Court will grant the application on the strength
of Plaintiffs allegation of indigence but dismiss the claims brought against the South River
Municipal Court because the Court lacks subject jurisdiction to hear them, see Seminole Tribe of
Fl. v. Florida, 517 U.S. 44, 54 (1996) (holding that the Eleventh Amendment precludes federal

jurisdiction over suits against a nonconsenting state).

1

Plaintiffs complaint refers to violations of "art. 1 par 1 and 10 of the New Jersey Constitution
under State law, specifically N.J.S.A. 10:1 to 6." (Compl. if 1, ECF No. 1.) The Court construes
this reference as a citation to N.J.S.A. 10:6-2, or the New Jersey Civil Rights Act ("NJCRA"),
which is analyzed under the same standard as § 1983." See Hottenstein v. City of Sea Isle City,
977 F. Supp. 2d 353, 365 (D.N.J. 2013). Accordingly, the Court will treat both sets of claims,
under§ 1983 and the NJCRA, identically.

Plaintiffs claims, as brought against the South River Municipal Court, must fail. "As part
of the judicial branch of the State of New Jersey, a New Jersey Municipal Court is entitled to
sovereign immunity" and is not a "person[]" for the purposes of§ 1983. Hernandez v. Switzer,
No. 09-5429, 2009 WL 4730182, at *3 (D.N.J. Dec. 4, 2009); Callahan v. City of Phila., 207 F.3d
668, 672 (3d Cir. 2000); see also Krieger v. Jersey City, 27 N.J. 535, 539 (1958) (The
establishment of municipal courts by the New Jersey legislature "was designed to replace a
haphazard set of local courts with a more effective system as part of a statewide judiciary.")
Accordingly, the Court is without jurisdiction to hear the claims brought against the South River
Municipal Court, and they are dismissed.
The remainder of Plaintiffs claims survive the Court's pre-docketing screening (without
prejudice to Defendants' right to move for dismissal).
Accordingly,

'\"!-;l{

IT IS, on this Jld day of August 2015, ORDERED that:
f/

1.

Plaintiffs application to proceed in forma pauper is is hereby granted pursuant to
28 u.s.c. § 1915;

2.

The Clerk of the Court shall file the Complaint without prepayment of fees or
security; and

3.

All claims brought against the South River Municipal Court are dismissed with
prejudice.

2