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)

Download PDF
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?