Kindricks v. Garland Police Dept et al

Filing 13

Order Accepting 10 Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. The court therefore overrules Plaintiff's 12 objections and dismisses with prejudice this action as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). (Ordered by Judge Sam A Lindsay on 10/29/2014) (tln)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
DALLAS DIVISION
§
§
Plaintiff,
§
v.
§
§
GARLAND POLICE DEPARTMENT, et al.,§
§
Defendants.
§
MARQUIS D. KINDRICKS,

Civil Action No. 3:14-CV-2961-L

ORDER
This case, which was filed by pro se Plaintiff Marquis D. Kindricks on August 18, 2014, was
referred to Magistrate Judge Renee Harris Toliver, who entered Findings, Conclusions and
Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge (“Report”) on September 29, 2014,
recommending that the action be dismissed with prejudice as legally and factually frivolous pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).*
On October 14, 2014, Plaintiff filed “Marquis D Kindricks Orders: False Claims Act and Qui
Tam” (Doc. 12), which the court construes as Plaintiff’s objections to the Report. Like his
pleadings, Plaintiff’s objections consist primarily of rambling, nonsensical references to various legal
principles and arguments. Plaintiff also asserts as follows:
I am, Marquis D Kindricks must know is the rule of law at a standstill within
the territorial jurisdiction of the United States?
I am, Marquis D Kindricks must know is the rule of law without force within
Garland in Garland Police Department within the territorial jurisdiction of the United
States?

*

The Report also notes that Plaintiff initiated another case on the same date against Progressive County Mutual
Insurance Company, which was assigned to this court. See Kindricks v. Progressive Cty. Mut. Ins. Co., No.
3:14-CV-02959-L-BH (N.D. Tex. 2014).
Order – Page 1

I am, Marquis D Kindricks must know is the court not able or willing to
enforce the rule of law within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States?
Pl.’s Obj. 2-3. After reviewing the pleadings, file, record in this case, objections, and Report, the
court concludes that the findings and conclusions of the magistrate judge are correct and accepts
them as those of the court. The court therefore overrules Plaintiff’s objections (Doc. 12) and
dismisses with prejudice this action as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).
It is so ordered this 29th day of October, 2014.

_________________________________
Sam A. Lindsay
United States District Judge

Order – Page 2