From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Barnett v. Paxton

United States District Court, Southern District of Texas
Jun 27, 2024
Civil Action 1:24-cv-00067 (S.D. Tex. Jun. 27, 2024)

Opinion

Civil Action 1:24-cv-00067

06-27-2024

CAROLINE SUE BARNETT, “Plaintiff,” v. KEN PAXTON, et al., “Defendants.”


ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Rolando Olvera, United States District Judge

Before the Court is the “Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation” (“R&R”) (Dkt. No. 10) and Plaintiff's “Objections” (Dkt. No. 13). Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, asserts various claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Defendants for sexual harassment, domestic violence, and witchcraft. Dkt. Nos. 1, 5, 6 & 8. On June 12, 2024, the Magistrate issued an R&R (Dkt. No. 10) recommending the Court dismiss with prejudice Plaintiff's Complaint (Dkt. No. 1) because her claims “are both legal and factually frivolous.” The Magistrate also found that Plaintiff fails to state a claim for which any relief can be granted. Id.

The Court has also received. Plaintiffs Letter entitled “Statement Discovery” (Dkt. No. 14).

Despite her filing “Objections” (Dkt. No. 13), Plaintiff fails to object to the Magistrate's finding that her claims are frivolous and failed to state a claim. Instead, Plaintiff merely reiterates the same meritless claims from her complaint without addressing or acknowledging the R&R. If there have been no objections to the Magistrate's ruling, then the appropriate standard of review is “clearly erroneous, abuse of discretion and contrary to law.” United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir. 1989). Finding no clear error, abuse of discretion, or finding contrary to law, the R&R (Dkt. No. 10) is ADOPTED.

For these reasons, Plaintiff's claims against Defendants are DISMISSED with prejudice. Plaintiff's objections are OVERRULED. The Clerk of the Court is ORDERED to close this case.

As referenced in the R&R (Dkt. No. 10), Plaintiff previously filed other cases with similar claims and defendants which were also dismissed. See e.g., Barnett v. Chacon, No. 23-50640, 2023 WL 8952594, at *1 (5th Cir. Dec. 28, 2023); Barnett v. Biden, No. 1:24-cv-124, 2024 WL 1080460, at *1 (W.D. Tex. Feb. 14, 2024); Barnett v. Chacon, No. 23-cv-00831, 2023 WL 4932605, at *1 (W.D. Tex. Aug. 1, 2023).


Summaries of

Barnett v. Paxton

United States District Court, Southern District of Texas
Jun 27, 2024
Civil Action 1:24-cv-00067 (S.D. Tex. Jun. 27, 2024)
Case details for

Barnett v. Paxton

Case Details

Full title:CAROLINE SUE BARNETT, “Plaintiff,” v. KEN PAXTON, et al., “Defendants.”

Court:United States District Court, Southern District of Texas

Date published: Jun 27, 2024

Citations

Civil Action 1:24-cv-00067 (S.D. Tex. Jun. 27, 2024)