Shavers-Smith v. State Of Texas et al

Filing 41

ORDER ADOPTING 39 Memorandum and Recommendations GRANTING 9 MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint for Violation of Civil Rights and Brief in Support Thereof, GRANTING 38 MOTION to Dismiss , GRANTING 26 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM , GRANTING 17 MOTION to Dismiss Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) ; Terminating as Moot 11 MOTION to Dismiss on the Basis of Eleventh Amendment Immunity.(Signed by Judge Gray H Miller) Parties notified.(rkonieczny, 4)

United States District Court
Southern District of Texas

ENTERED
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTON DIVISION
CAROL SHAVERS-SMITH,
Plaintiff,
v.
STATE OF TEXAS, et al.,
Defendants.

§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§

June 25, 2018
David J. Bradley, Clerk

CIVIL ACTION H-17-2591

ORDER
Pending before the court is a Memorandum and Recommendation (“M&R”) issued by
Magistrate Judge Nancy Johnson. Dkt.39. The Magistrate Judge recommends dismissing all of
plaintiff Carol Shavers-Smith claims as time-barred by the statute of limitations. Id. Shavers-Smith
is pro se. Shavers-Smith’s complaint states that it is for “civil rights violations” and in the
“statement of the claim” section, she states that her claim is for “denial of due process and void order
to take our home.” Dkt. 1. She indicates that the dates of the events giving rise to her claim are
“November 6, 2012, December 2012, January 2013, April 2013, May 2013, Ejection/Eviction
August 21, 2013.” Id. In her response to the motions to dismiss, she states that her claims are
asserted under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Dkt. 34. The Magistrate Judge recommends dismissal of ShaversSmith’s claims because the statute of limitations for § 1983 claims is four years, and the latest event
the plaintiff alleges occurred on August 21, 2013. Dkt. 39.
Shavers-Smith filed objections to the M&R in which she discusses allegations about an
alleged forged deed of trust and due process violations and asserts that the M&R erroneously found
res judicata and collateral estoppel and erroneously followed the basic principles of decision for a
motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6). See Dkt. 40. The M&R, however, followed the correct rules

regarding evaluating a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), and it correctly found that ShaversSmith’s due process claims were barred by the four-year statute-of-limitations. See Dkt. 39.
After a de novo review, the court finds that the Magistrate Judge correctly recommended
dismissal of Shavers-Smith’s claims, which all stem from § 1983, because they are barred by the
statute of limitations. This is evident from the face of the complaint. The M&R is therefore
ADOPTED IN FULL. The motions to dismiss filed by defendant Leme Properties, Inc. (Dkt. 9),
defendant Ivonne Thomas (Dkt. 17), defendants Angel L. Reyes and Associates, P.C. and Chance
Oliver (Dkt. 26), and defendant HSBC Bank USA, National Association, as Indenture Trustee for
People’s Choice Home Loan Securities Trust Series 2005-4 (Dkt. 38) are all GRANTED. ShaversSmith’s claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. The court will issue a final judgment
concurrently with this order.
Signed at Houston, Texas on June 25, 2018.

___________________________________
Gray H. Miller
United States District Judge

2