Opinion
4:23-cv-10109-KMM
04-30-2024
REYGAN BOURGAULT, Plaintiff, v. CHARLES BRITT, et al., Defendants.
ORDER ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
K. MICHAEL MOORE, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon pro se Plaintiff's Amended Complaint (“Am. Compl.”) (ECF No. 15) and Motion for Referral to Volunteer Attorney Program (ECF No. 16). The Court referred the matter to the Honorable Lisette M. Reid, United States Magistrate Judge, who issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that the Amended Complaint be DISMISSED and all pending motions be DENIED AS MOOT. (“R&R”) (ECF No. 21). Instead of filing objections to the R&R, Plaintiff filed a Motion for Relief Judgment and Judgment on the Pleadings (ECF No. 22) and a Motion for Recusal of Magistrate Reid and Direct Line of Communication with Judge Moore (ECF No. 23). The matter is now ripe for review. As set forth below, the Court ADOPTS the R&R.
This action stems from Plaintiff's Amended Complaint, which Plaintiff filed after she was ordered to amend her original complaint to demonstrate a basis for the Court's jurisdiction over this case. See generally Am. Compl. Therein, Plaintiff contends that Defendants-including the United States, multiple state attorneys and judges, and a supervisor at a foster care organization- took her children without cause. R&R at 1-2. Plaintiff seeks $500 million in damages and a “full investigation” into the foster care organization's alleged wrongdoing. Id. at 2.
The Court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(3). As set forth in the R&R, Magistrate Judge Reid finds that (1) this suit is frivolous and should be dismissed on all counts and against all Defendants; (2) the Court is without subject matter jurisdiction because none of the causes of action tie the Amended Complaint to questions arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States; and (3) even assuming that the Amended Complaint was well-pleaded and the Court retains subject matter jurisdiction, several Defendants (namely, judges and prosecutors) are immune from suit. See R&R at 3-6. Therefore, Magistrate Judge Reid recommends that the Amended Complaint should be dismissed and all other motions should be denied as moot. Id. at 6. This Court agrees.
Under Rule 15, leave to amend should be freely given “when justice so requires.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a)(2). Here, Plaintiff has already been given an opportunity to amend her complaint. In light of Magistrate Judge Reid's findings and recommendation, the Court concludes that further amendment of the Amended Complaint would be futile. Therefore, dismissal of this case with prejudice is appropriate. See Hall v. United Ins. Co. of Am., 367 F.3d 1255, 1263 (11th Cir. 2004) (citation omitted) (“[A] district court may properly deny leave to amend the complaint under Rule 15(a) when such amendment would be futile.”).
Accordingly, UPON CONSIDERATION of the Amended Complaint, the R&R, the pertinent portions of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that:
1. Magistrate Judge Reid's Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 21) is ADOPTED;
2. The Amended Complaint (ECF No. 15) is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE;
3. All other motions are DENIED AS MOOT;
4. The Clerk of Court is INSTRUCTED to CLOSE this case.
DONE AND ORDERED.