SCHOOLEY v. PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, et al.
Filing
35
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER re 30 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION re 26 MOTION to Dismiss 1 Complaint filed by D. KELLY, PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, J.D. SMITH, BRIGGS. Defendants' Motion to Dismiss is hereby GR ANTED with prejudice. Petitioner's pending 23 MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by RUSSELL SCHOOLEY is dismissed as moot. The Report and Recommendation is hereby adopted as the Opinion of the Court. The Certificate of Appealability is denied. Signed by Judge Maurice B. Cohill on 8/27/2014. (cag)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
RUSSELL SCHOOLEY,
Petitioner,
v.
CORRECTIONAL OFFICER
J.D. SMITH, et al.,
Respondents.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Civil Action No. 14ยท515
Senior District Judge Maurice R. Cohill
Magistrate Judge Susan Paradise Baxter
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Petitioner, Russell Schooley ("Schooley"), filed a Complaint in the Middle District of
Pennsylvania, in February 10,2014 (CA No.3: 14-cv-224) against Officers J.D. Smith, Briggs,
and D. Kelly, and the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections [ECF No.1]. In the Complaint
Schooley alleges that Officer J.D. Smith destroyed Schooley's auto mechanic textbooks and that
OfIicer Briggs failed to prevent this destruction of property. Schooley further alleges that
OfIicer D. Kelly issued a written misconduct to him as retaliation for a grievance that Schooley
had filed against OfIicer J.D. Smith regarding the destruction of property.
On March 6, 2014 Magistrate Judge Blewitt, of the Middle District of Pennsylvania,
recommended transferring the case to the Western District because all of the claims arose in the
Western District at SCI-Greene and all of the Defendants are employed in the Western District
[ECF No.6 at 1]. By order of court, adopting the Report and Recommendation ("R & R") of
Judge Blewitt, the case was transferred to the Western District of Pennsylvania on April 21, 2014
[ECF No.1 0]. It is our understanding that this case, originally filed at CA No.3: 14-cv-224, is
duplicative, due to clerical error, of a case currently pending in the Middle District of
Pennsylvania filed by Schooley on December 4,2013 at CA No. 3:13-cv-2929. Magistrate
Judge Lenihan is recommending our case at issue (transferred case CA No. 3:14-cv-224) be
dismissed as duplicative, that the pending motions be dismissed as moot, and that this case be
closed.
After de novo review of the two pending cases, together with the report and
recommendation and objections thereto, we agree with Magistrate Judge Lenihan's July 22,2014
R&R (ECF No. 30) that the cases filed in the Middle District at numbers CA No.3: 13-cv-2929
and CA No.3: 14-cv-224 (now our case at issue) are identical with regard to facts of the cases,
claims, petitioner and defendants.
Schooley, in his Objections to the R&R [ECF No. 34), misunderstands the intent and
consequence of Judge Lenihan's R &R to mean that the case should not have been transferred
and that his case in its entirety should be dismissed. This is not so. Judge Lenihan states that the
case before us in the Western District of Pennsylvania is already in litigation in the Middle
District of Pennsylvania, (and we might add has been actively and thoughtfully reviewed and
litigated for the past 8 months), and the identical case is before us due to clerical error.
Therefore, the case before us should be dismissed to allow the pending original case in the
Middle District to be fully litigated. We agree.
Therefore, the following Order is entered:
And now to-wit, this
1..1~Of August 2014, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED,
and DECREED that the Petitioner's Complaint [ECF No.1) is DISMISSED with prejudice.
The pending Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order (ECF No. 23) and Motion to Dismiss
[ECF No. 26) are dismissed as moot. The Report the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate
Judge Lenihan dated July 22,2014 [ECF No. 30) is adopted as the Opinion of the Court.
2
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a Certificate of Appealability is DENIED. The Clerk
shall mark this case CLOSED.
~~. 6. flog,\.
Maurice B. Cohill
Senior United States District Court Judge
Western District of Pennsylvania
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?