Modrall v. Hamilton County et al

Filing 7

ORDER denying 2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis; adopting 6 Report and Recommendations. Signed by District Judge Curtis L Collier on 8/12/14. (mailed to plaintiff) (GRE, )

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE AT CHATTANOOGA ROBERT G. MODRALL, Plaintiff, v. HAMILTON COUNTY, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 1:14-CV-130 Judge Curtis L. Collier JUDGMENT ORDER Pro se Plaintiff Robert G. Modrall (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against Defendants Hamilton County, Tennessee, the State of Tennessee, the FBI, and the U.S. Attorney’s Office (“Defendants”) (Court File No. 1) along with a motion to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) (Court File No. 2). Magistrate Judge Susan K. Lee allowed Plaintiff to amend these filings to fix deficiencies in them (Court File No. 3). Plaintiff subsequently filed an amended complaint (Court File No. 4) and a new motion for IFP (Court File No. 5). The Magistrate Judge filed a report and recommendation (“R&R”) concluding that (1) Plaintiff has not shown insufficient funds such that he would be entitled him to IFP status and (2) Plaintiff’s amended complaint is frivolous and fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.1 Plaintiff has not filed an objection to the R&R within the allotted time. Accordingly, the Court ACCEPTS and ADOPTS the magistrate judge’s R&R (Court File No. 6) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), DENIES Plaintiff’s IFP motion (Court File No. 2), and DIRECTS the Clerk of Court to CLOSE the case. 1 He seeks relief in the form of “restitution in the amount of $100 million, a Presidential Medal of Freedom with Distinction, and a Nobel Peace Prize” (Court File No. 5, p. 22). SO ORDERED. ENTER: /s/ CURTIS L. COLLIER UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE ENTERED AS A JUDGMENT s/ Debra C. Poplin CLERK OF COURT

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?