From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Grant v. U.S. Dep't of the Treasury

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION
Aug 7, 2018
CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:18cv291 (E.D. Tex. Aug. 7, 2018)

Summary

noting that Plaintiff had filed at least seventeen complaints in various district courts making similar allegations related to a hostile work environment claim

Summary of this case from Grant v. U.S. Dep't of Justice

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:18cv291

08-07-2018

WILLIAM LEE GRANT, II v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY


ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, which contains her findings, conclusions, and recommendation for the disposition of the complaint has been presented for consideration. The Report and Recommendation (Docket No. 4), filed on June 25, 2018, recommends that Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis be denied and that the complaint be dismissed with prejudice as barred by the doctrine of res judicata and as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). Docket No. 4. Plaintiff filed written objections on July 3, 2018. Docket No. 6.

In his written objections, Plaintiff does not present any facts to dispute the finding that the complaint is barred by res judicata. Similarly, Plaintiff does not dispute that, pursuant to an order entered in the Northern District of Texas in William Lee Grant, II v. United States Department of Defense, Civil Action No. 4:18-cv-471, he is prohibited from proceeding in forma pauperis until he pays a sanction of $100. Plaintiff filed this lawsuit seeking to proceed in forma pauperis even though he has not paid the sanction.

Having made a de novo review of the written objections filed by Plaintiff in response to the Report and Recommendation, the Court concludes that the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are correct and the objections are without merit. It is therefore

ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Docket No. 2) is DENIED. It is further

ORDERED that the complaint is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as barred by the doctrine of res judicata and as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).

Any motion not previously ruled on is DENIED.

SIGNED this 7th day of August, 2018.

/s/_________

ROBERT W. SCHROEDER III

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Grant v. U.S. Dep't of the Treasury

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION
Aug 7, 2018
CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:18cv291 (E.D. Tex. Aug. 7, 2018)

noting that Plaintiff had filed at least seventeen complaints in various district courts making similar allegations related to a hostile work environment claim

Summary of this case from Grant v. U.S. Dep't of Justice

dismissing complaint noting that Plaintiff has filed at least seventeen complaints in various district courts making similar allegations

Summary of this case from Grant v. Harris

dismissing complaint as barred by res judicata and as frivolous, and noting that Plaintiff had filed at least seventeen complaints in various district courts making similar allegations related to a hostile work environment claim

Summary of this case from Grant v. Harris

dismissing complaint as barred by res judicata and as frivolous, and noting that Grant had filed at least seventeen complaints in various district courts making similar allegations related to a hostile work environment claim

Summary of this case from Grant v. Harris
Case details for

Grant v. U.S. Dep't of the Treasury

Case Details

Full title:WILLIAM LEE GRANT, II v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION

Date published: Aug 7, 2018

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:18cv291 (E.D. Tex. Aug. 7, 2018)

Citing Cases

Grant v. U.S. Dep't of Justice

In addition, the Court notes that Plaintiff has been recognized as a frequent filer of frivolous litigation…

Grant v. Harris

Thus, Plaintiff is barred from reasserting these claims by the doctrine of res judicata. See Grant v. United…