Skip to content.
About GPO   |   Newsroom/Media   |   Congressional Relations   |   Inspector General   |   Careers   |   Contact   |   askGPO   |   Help  
 

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)
 

07-1059 - Morris v. James et al (INMATE2)


Download Files

Metadata

Document in Context
07-1059 - Morris v. James et al (INMATE2)
February 8, 2008
PDF | More
pursuant to 28 USC 1915(A),(b)(1); 2) The complaint, to the extent that it states claims against Dfts James and Taylor for legal malpractice, be dismissed as this court is without subject matter jurisdiction over such claims; 3) The complaint, to the extent that it is based on claims of ineffective assistance of counsel against Defendants James and Taylor, be dismissed without prejudice to Plaintiff's right to file the appropriate civil action in which he may raise such claims; 4) The complaint against dft Redmond, to the extent that it is filed as a Bivens action, be dismissed under 28 USC 1915(A)(b)(1); 5) The complaint against dft Redmond, to the extent that it is based on a claim of prosecutorial misconduct, be dismissed without prejudice to plaintiff's right to file the appropriate civil action in which he may raise such a claim; and 6) Plaintiff's complaint be dismissed prior to service of process Objections to R&R due by 2/21/2008. Signed by Judge Susan Russ Walker on 2/8/08. (vma, )REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 1 Inmate 1983 Complaint filed by George Hoey Morris; it is the Recommendation of the Mag Judge that: 1) The complaint against dfts James and Taylor, to the extent that it is filed under 42 USC 1983/Bivens, be dismissed
February 28, 2008
PDF | More
ORDER it is the Order, Judgment and Decree of the Court that: 1) The objection (doc. 13 is overruled; 2) Adopting 10 ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS; The complaint against defendants James and Taylor, to the extent that it is filed by 42 USC 1983 and Bivens, is dismissed pursuant to 28 USC 1915(A)(b)(1); 4) The complaint, to the extent that it states claims against defendants James and Taylor for legal malpractice, is dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction; 5) The complaint, to the extent that it is based on claims of ineffective assistance of counsel against defendants James and Taylor, is dismissed without prejudice; 6) The complaint against Defendant Redmond, to the extent that it is filed as a Bivens action, is dismissed pursuant to 28 USC 1915(a)(b)(1); 7) The complaint against Defendant Redmond, to the extent that it is based on a claim of prosecutorial misconduct, is dismissed without prejudice; Plaintiff's complaint is dismissed prior to service of process. Signed by Judge William Keith Watkins on 2/28/08. (Attachments: # (1) appeals checklist)(vma, )