Calvert v. Safranek

Full title: EMERSON FALLICE CALVERT, Plaintiff, v. ROBERT J. SAFRANEK, STANLEY…

Court: United States District Court, D. Colorado

Date published: Jan 30, 2006

Civil Case No. 05-cv-01713-REB-PAC (D. Colo. Jan. 30, 2006)

Opinion

Civil Case No. 05-cv-01713-REB-PAC.

January 30, 2006

ORDER ADOPTING RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

ROBERT BLACKBURN, District Judge

The matters before me are (1) the Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge [#38], filed December 19, 2005; and (2) plaintiff's objections to the recommendation, entitled Answer to Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge [#41], filed December 28, 2005. I overrule the objections, approve and adopt the recommendation, and dismiss plaintiff's claims.

As required by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), I have reviewed de novo all portions of the recommendations to which cognizable objections have been filed, and have considered carefully the recommendations, the objections, and the applicable case law. In addition, because plaintiff is proceeding pro se, I have construed his pleadings more liberally and held them to a less stringent standard than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers. See Haines v. Kerner, 104 U.S. 519, 520-21 (1072), Hall v. Bellmon, 935 F.2d 1106, 1110 (10^th Cir. 1991). The recommendation is detailed and well-reasoned. Plaintiff's objections are imponderous and without merit. Therefore, I find and conclude that the arguments advanced, authorities cited, and findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendation proposed by the magistrate judge should be approved and adopted.

THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED as follows:

1. That the Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge [#38], filed December 19, 2005, is APPROVED AND ADOPTED as an order of this court;

2. That plaintiff's objections to the recommendation as stated in his Answer to Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge [#41], filed December 28, 2005, are OVERRULED and DENIED;

3. That the Combined Motion to Dismiss and Memorandum in Support Thereof [#5], filed September 29, 2005, is GRANTED insofar as it seeks dismissal on the bases that plaintiff's claims are barred by the Rooker-Feldman doctrine and that defendant Safranek is entitled to prosecutorial immunity;

4. That Defendant Brinkley's Motion to Dismiss [#8], filed September 30, 2005, is GRANTED;

5. That plaintiff's claims alleging violation of his rights to due process and equal protection, and for malicious prosecution, under the Fourteenth Amendment are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE;

6. That plaintiff's claims against defendant Safranek for malicious prosecution and his claims against defendant Brinkley for defamation are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, and judgment SHALL ENTER in favor of defendants Robert J. Safranek and Stanley Brinkley and against plaintiff, Emerson Fallice Calvert, as to those claims;

7. That defendants Safranek and Brinkley are AWARDED their costs, to be taxed by the Clerk of the Court pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(d)(1) and D.C.COLO.LCivR 54.1.