Brown v. South Carolina, State of et al
Filing
102
ORDER AND OPINION RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION adopting 37 Report and Recommendation and dismissing the complaint without prejudice and without issuance and service of process, for lack of subject matter jurisdiction denying as moot 18 Motion for Injunction; denying as moot 13 Motion to Amend/Correct 5 Amended Complaint; denying as moot 20 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis; denying as moot 7 Motion for Relief Sought; denying as moot [9 2] Motion for a reasonable accommodation to bypass any statutes of limitations on time that would otherwise bar this action from proceeding to judgment; denying as moot 22 Motion for Injunction; denying as moot 77 Motion to Appoint Counsel; denying as moot 11 Motion to File Bank Account Number; denying as moot 34 Motion for Recognition of Marital Rights Signed by Chief Judge Margaret B Seymour on 9/27/2012. (asni, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
COLUMBIA DIVISION
Orlando Ira Brown,
)
) C/A No. 3:12-221-MBS
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
) ORDER AND OPINION
State of South Carolina; City of Columbia, )
S.C.; Richland County; Richland County
)
Sheriffs; FBI,
)
)
Defendants.
)
____________________________________)
Plaintiff Orlando Ira Brown, proceeding pro se, filed the within action on January 24, 2012,
alleging the following:
On, or shortly thereafter by one week, 11-28-2011, I was advised to take a
polygraph test before any further actions would commence, regarding the report I
gave to 911 dispatched authority figures, per Investigator Tanner with the Richland
County Sheriff’s Department. I explained to Investigator Tanner I was disabled,
therefor unable. Investigator Tanner was delusional, stating that my story was
“concocted.” The State of South Carolina is liable for oversight of ethical
procedures. The City of Columbia is liable for oversight of ethical procedures. The
County of Richland is liable for ethical procedures. The Richland County sheriff’s
Department is liable for ethical procedures.
Another Investigator from the Sheriff’s Department of Richland County
called me one month later. This was harrassment, due to fact of explained
experiences and cases cited to previous investigator regarding polygraph testing and
my history with officials of policing authorities discounting my word.
I contacted the F.B.I. in Columbia, S.C. and explained dealings with corrupt
officials, phone calls and federal suits filed in forma pauperis three years ago, and
ensuining of liabilities that stem, for purpose of gaining their assistance to secure
residential, banking and commerce access without further interrupts of the course of
civil procedure I commenced in 2008 with a forma pauperis filed to complain against
President Barrack Obama. I was excluded from the F.B.I.’s resource ability to
accomodate procedure to identify phone interrupts. Advice given was unused.
I request the Americans with Disabilities stated statute amount for pain and
suffering due to mental distress. I request twenty four hour security for myself and
family, forward for all my descendants and future generations, to be paid for by me
through private contract, from unspecified funds ordered through this district of
federal court, to be accessible by me for unlimited amount of necessary, to achieve
privately contracted security of interests.
ECF No. 1, 3-5.
Plaintiff submitted additional claims on February 8, 2012, as follows:
Subsequent claims: Bank of America excluded me from privileges in January 2012.
Chase Bank excluded me from privileges in July 2011. Regions Bank excluded me
from privileges in January 2012. Telecheck blocked my accounting privileges in
January 2012. President Barack Obama sent my fiancee an emailed invitation to
lunch at the White House. President Barack Obama placed an artificial penis on a
“dumby” pilot in a helicopter on CNN in July 2008. Thomas O’campo threatenned,
harrassed, and discriminated against myself and interests in July 2008. The
California Supreme Court would not recognize my answer to Thomas O’campo’s
eviction papers in August 2008. Mission Grove Park apartments blackballed,
threatenned, and unlawfully evicted me in March 2008. The Riverside County
Sherrif’s Department in the State of California arrested and convicted me multiple
times, in light of my claimed disability rights of non-prisoner. The California State
Prison system illegally classified me with a violent criminal, which escalated from
confessions of murder by my cellmate, guard harrassment, and further reports and
claims within in July 2010 to March 2011. The California State prison system
violated my rights from “Double Jeopardy” by placing me on parole in March 2011.
Allan Seigal, attorney at law, committed legal malpractice while retained by me in
May 2008 via negating retainor and damaging verbiage. Pensanti and Associates
committed legal malpractice through negating our retainor in 2009. Allsouth Federal
Credit Union excluded me from banking privileges in January 2012. Strom
Thurmond law firm discriminated against me; Franchot Brown, attorneys at law,
denied legal representation; Reid and Hellyer Law offices accepted and denied legal
representation; Richard Breibart, attorney at law, discriminated and falsely advertised
the unfound address; The Christian Legal Center, LLC denied services; Shadd Law
Firm falsely advertised availability; The Obama store denied immediate 911 phone
call, once I was given use of phone, 911 would not answer, on 11-25-12. Enterprise
rent a car discriminated against me in February 2012, and previous 1 month provided
a rental vehicle that was accessible to unknown 3rd party, violating my privacy.
Brenda Feigan discrimanated legal services in October 2011. Morris Getzels law
firm denied services in October 2011. John Mccauley was a referred denial of legal
2
services. Riverside County Sheriff’s Department refused to give me security of
“their” service to California after a 45 minute wait for their arrival upon calling 911,
while my fiancee’s daughter and some other I did not know from the neighborhood,
and Nikki beat at the hinges of my bedroom door violently in October 2011, which
resulted in my fiancee’s daughter, locking me out of my house the next day, and, my
daughter in law’s confident removal of her mother and I’s bedroom door knobs. A
Sargent at Columbia City Police Department stated he would have an investigator
follow up with a phone call to me one week after I reported information regarding a
double homicide 2010 or early 2011, and the threatenning texts I received from my
fiancee’s daughter in January 2012; evidencing her brother as suspect to question
regarding his visit to South Carolina during that time period. That Sargent has not
responded as stated. CVS pharmacy displayed a picture of President Obama in the
photographs format for my personal view and retrieval of my brow in November or
December of 2011 in my childhood town of Blythewood. One of my local churches
falsely doctrined from the Bible that of suing as non-Christian like in November
2011. My fiancee does possess traits of great fear and lack of faith in equality since
meeting me in 2007. The United States Postal Service has harrassed, threatenned,
manipulated, and instilled a hostile work environment as a normalcy my pain and
suffering won’t accept for myself, or my fiancee’s employment. All Start Motors
“refused to accept a personal check”; Carmax” “; Bush River Auto Mall “ ” ; Dick
Dyer Toyota/Scion “ ”; Jones Chevrolet Cadillac “ ”; Capital Chevrolet “ ”; Capital
Hyandai “ ”.
ECF No. 5.
In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Rule 73.02, D.S.C., this matter was referred
to United States Magistrate Paige J. Gossett for pretrial handling. On March 14, 2012, the
Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation in which she construed Plaintiff’s complaint
as raising claims under to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and the
Rehabilitation Act. The Magistrate Judge determined that the federal court lacks jurisdiction over
Plaintiff’s complaint because (1) there is lack of complete diversity between the parties; and (2)
Plaintiff’s allegations are insufficient to show that the case is one arising under the Constitution,
laws, or treaties of the United States. The Magistrate Judge determined that Plaintiff’s allegations
fail to explain in even the broadest terms how the named Defendants violated Plaintiff’s
3
constitutional rights or the ADA. Accordingly, the Magistrate Judge recommended that the case be
dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. On March 20, 2012, Plaintiff filed objections to
the Report and Recommendation.
The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this court. The recommendation has
no presumptive weight. The responsibility for making a final determination remains with this court.
Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270 (1976). This court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole
or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the Magistrate Judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
This court may also receive further evidence or recommit the matter to the Magistrate Judge with
instructions. Id. This court is obligated to conduct a de novo review of every portion of the
Magistrate Judge’s report to which objections have been filed. Id.
In his objections, Plaintiff states:
Federal jurisdiction is warranted by way of amended complaint showing diversity of
citizenship, mailed for file 3-19-12, opposite lack of jurisdiction prior to amended
complaint.
Clarification of pleading is as the following. Waiting on justice since 11-4-99 has
caused mental disability. Mental disability is substanced inside of me with anxiety
and frustration. That substance shows on my outward characterizations as suspect.
Looking as suspect as gained treatment as suspect and will continue to till those
feelings that look as such are replaced with the feelings that justice provide.
ECF No. 48.
It appears that Plaintiff argues that the court possesses diversity jurisdiction because he
named a number of out-of-state entities in the allegations of his amended complaint. Assuming for
purposes of review that Plaintiff states any cognizable allegations against the entities named in the
amended complaint, Plaintiff still cannot prevail. As the Magistrate Judge properly noted, 28 U.S.C.
§ 1332 requires complete diversity of citizenship; that is, no party on one side may be a citizen of
4
the same state as any part on the other side. See Owen Equip. & Erection Co. v. Kroger, 437 U.S.
365, 372-74 (1978). In this case, Plaintiff is a citizen of South Carolina, and so are a number of
Defendants and other entities named by Plaintiff. Plaintiff’s objection is without merit.
The court adopts the Report and Recommendation and incorporates it herein by reference.
Plaintiff’s complaint is summarily dismissed, without prejudice and without issuance and service
of process, for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. All remaining pending motions are denied as moot
(ECF Nos. 7, 11, 13, 18, 20, 22, 34, 77, 92).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/ Margaret B. Seymour
Chief United States District Judge
Columbia, South Carolina
September 27, 2012.
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL
Plaintiff is hereby notified of the right to appeal this order
pursuant to Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.
5
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?