Amos v. Solovan et al

Filing 3

ORDER adopting Report and Recommendations re 2 Report and Recommendations.. Signed by Judge James L. Graham on 10/12/2017. (ds)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION
John E. Amos,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 2:17-cv-819

John M. Solovan, II, et al.,
Defendants.
ORDER
This is an action under 42 U.S.C. §1985(2) filed by John E.
Amos, an Ohio pro se inmate, against John M. Solovan, II, the
retired Ohio common pleas court judge who presided over plaintiff’s
2007 criminal trial in Belmont County, Dan Fry (also spelled
“Frye”), and James L. Nichelson, the attorney who represented
plaintiff in the criminal proceedings.

Plaintiff alleges that

defendants Solovan and Fry conspired to illegally indict plaintiff,
and

that

defendant

Nichelson

joined

the

conspiracy

when

he

represented plaintiff in the criminal case.
On September 19, 2017, the magistrate judge filed a report and
recommendation on the initial screen of plaintiff’s complaint
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1915A, which requires the court, “in a civil
action in which a prisoner seeks redress from a governmental entity
or officer or employee of a governmental entity,” to dismiss a
complaint that fails to state a claim upon which relief may be
granted.

28 U.S.C. §1915A(a)-(b)(1).

The magistrate judge noted

that the statute of limitations applicable to §1985 claims in Ohio
is two years.
events

alleged

The magistrate judge concluded that because the
in

the

complaint

preceded

the

May

4,

2007,

imposition of sentence in plaintiff’s state criminal case, the

instant complaint is barred by the statute of limitations.
The report and recommendation specifically advised the parties
that objections to the report and recommendation were due within
fourteen days, and that the failure to object to the report and
recommendation would result in a waiver of the right to de novo
review by the district judge and a waiver of the right to appeal
the judgment of the District Court.

Doc. 2, p. 5.

The time period

for filing objections to the report and recommendation has expired,
and no objections to the report and recommendation have been filed.
The court agrees with the report and recommendation (Doc. 2),
and it is hereby adopted. This action is hereby dismissed pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. §1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) because plaintiff’s complaint fails
to state a claim for which relief may be granted.

The clerk shall

enter judgement dismissing this case.

Date: October 12, 2017

s/James L. Graham
James L. Graham
United States District Judge

2