Opinion
Case No. 1:15-cv-697
11-16-2015
MALLON ROBERTS, Plaintiff, v. JUDGE MELBA D. MARSH, et al., Defendants.
Magistrate Judge Karen L. Litkovitz
DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (Doc. 4)
This case is before the Court pursuant to the Order of General Reference in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio Western Division to United States Magistrate Judge Karen L. Litkovitz. Pursuant to such reference, the Magistrate Judge reviewed the pleadings filed with this Court and, on October 29, 2015, submitted a Report and Recommendations. (Doc. 4). Plaintiff filed objections. (Doc. 5).
Plaintiff raises two objections: (1) Judges Marsh and Crouse are not entitled to immunity because they did not have jurisdiction to act; and (2) the two year statute of limitations did not begin to run until Plaintiff received the November 25, 2014 letter from the Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas. (Doc. 5). Assuming arguendo that Judges Marsh and Crouse are not entitled to absolute immunity, Plaintiff's claims are still barred by the two-year statute of limitations. Plaintiff argues that the statute of limitations did not begin to run until November 25, 2014, when he received a letter from the Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas responding to his request for a journalized order. However, unlike the fraud case Plaintiff cites, Plaintiff was aware of the alleged civil rights violation at the time of his 2005 trial when Judge Crouse presided over his case instead of Judge Marsh. Plaintiff provides no explanation for why he waited until 2014, nine years after his trial, to contact the Court. --------
As required by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), the Court has reviewed the comprehensive findings of the Magistrate Judge and considered de novo all of the filings in this matter. Upon consideration of the foregoing, the Court does determine that such Report and Recommendations should be and is hereby adopted in its entirety. Accordingly:
1. Plaintiff's complaint (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED with prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1915(e)(2)(B) and 1915A(b)(1); and
2. The Court certifies that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), an appeal of this Order would not be taken in good faith and therefore Plaintiff is denied leave to appeal in forma pauperis.
3. The Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly whereupon this case is TERMINATED in this Court.
IT IS SO ORDERED. Date: 11/16/15
s/ Timothy S . Black
Timothy S. Black
United States District Judge