Qualls v. Crow et al

Filing 16

ORDER denying 13 Motion for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis and denying 14 Motion for Certificate of Appealability. Signed by Judge Edmund A. Sargus on 11/25/2024. (cmw)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION ERIC A. QUALLS, Plaintiff, Case No. 2:23-cv-3889 JUDGE EDMUND A. SARGUS, JR. Magistrate Judge Elizabeth P. Deavers v. FRED W. CROW, III, et al., Defendants. ORDER This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Eric A. Qualls’s Motion for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis (ECF No. 13) and Plaintiff’s Motion for Certificate of Appealability (ECF No. 14). This Court dismissed all Mr. Qualls’s claims against Defendants (ECF No. 10) after considering the Magistrate Judge’s Order and Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 6), recommending dismissal, and Mr. Qualls’s objections to that Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 8). In the same Order, this Court certified, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), “that any appeal of this Order would not be taken in good faith, and Plaintiff is therefore denied leave to appeal in forma pauperis.” (ECF No. 10, PageID 89.) Accordingly, Mr. Qualls’s Motion for Leave to Appeal in forma pauperis is DENIED. (ECF No. 13.) Mr. Qualls moves for a Certificate of Appealability under 28 U.S.C. § 2253. (ECF No. 14, PageID 102.) But that Section only applies in “a habeas corpus proceeding or a proceeding under section 2255.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(a). Here, Mr. Qualls’s claims were brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Accordingly, Mr. Qualls’s Motion for Certificate of Appealability (ECF No. 14) is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. 11/25/2024 DATE s/Edmund A. Sargus, Jr. EDMUND A. SARGUS, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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?