Janes v. USA
Filing
12
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS as to 10 Report and Recommendations- Case Closed. Signed by Judge Clark Waddoups on 2/11/13. (jmr)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION
JOHNNIE B. JANES,
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION
Plaintiff,
vs.
Case No. 2:12-cv-0931 CW-PMW
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
District Judge Clark Waddoups
Defendant.
Magistrate Judge Paul M. Warner
This case was assigned to United States District Court Judge Clark Waddoups, who then
referred it to United States Magistrate Paul M. Warner under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). On January
15, 2013, Judge Warner issued a Report and Recommendation, recommending that the case be
dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. Plaintiff Johnnie B. Janes filed an Objection to the
Report and Recommendation on January 29, 2013. Accordingly, the court has reviewed the record
de novo.
Mr. Janes asserts a claim under the Federal Tort Claims Act. After exhausting his
administrative remedies, Mr. Janes was advised he could file his tort claim in federal district court,
but the claim had to be filed within six months. Mr. Janes complied with the six month requirement,
but filed his claim in state court rather than federal court. It is apparent from the title page of his
pleadings and the body of the text that he thought he was filing his claim in federal court. This was
an unfortunate mistake to which the court is sympathetic.
Despite the court’s sympathies for Mr. Janes’ situation, it lacks the power to remedy the
situation for the reasons stated in Judge Warner’s report. The court therefore APPROVES AND
ADOPTS Judge Warner’s Report and Recommendation in its entirety.1 Each party shall bear one’s
own costs.
SO ORDERED this 11th day of February, 2013.
BY THE COURT:
____________________________________
Clark Waddoups
United States District Judge
1
Dkt. No. 10.
-2-
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?