In re Abraham

Full title: IN RE: ALHAJI ABRAHAM aka AARON PACKETT

Court: United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Date published: Jul 23, 2003

03-mc-00131, Civil Action No. 03-0287 (E.D. Pa. Jul. 23, 2003)

Opinion

03-mc-00131, Civil Action No. 03-0287

July 23, 2003

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

FRANKLIN VAN ANTWERPEN, District Judge

Presently before this court is Plaintiff Alhaji Abraham's letter filed on July 14, 2003. Plaintiff would like us to consider this letter a Motion for Writ of Habeas Corpus, we assume under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, and a civil suit for negligence against Judge John P. Fullam. Plaintiff claims that he was insulted by the language used in Judge John P. Fullam's order denying his previous claim. Mr. Abraham has already been informed in a prior order that judges are absolutely immune from suit. Plaintiff's habeas corpus motion will be denied and his attempt to commence a negligence suit against Judge John P. Fullam will also be denied.

I. Background

Plaintiff, a state prison inmate, previously sought leave to proceed in forma pauperis on a civil rights action. Judge Fullam declined to allow Abraham's action to proceed because, among other things: "(1) plaintiff's proposed complaint makes no sense whatsoever, and may be the product of an unbalanced mind; the judge-defendants are absolutely immune from suit." See Abraham v. D.A. of Philadelphia, No. 03-0287 (E.D. Pa Jan. 31, 2003). Plaintiff claims that he has been insulted by this language and now brings this action.

II. Jurisdiction

We have jurisdiction to hear habeas corpus petitions under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Sandoval v. Reno, 166 F.3d 225, 237-238 (3d Cir. 1999). We also have jurisdiction to hear suits against federal officials. Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999 (1971).

III. Discussion

Plaintiff fails, at this time, to state a valid cause of action for his habeas corpus petition and we will dismiss this cause of action without prejudice to the Plaintiff's right to refile this cause of action upon the proper forms.

Plaintiff also fails to state a valid cause of action for his negligence claim. The plaintiff has already been informed in a prior order that a judge has absolute immunity from suit for any acts committed within their judicial jurisdiction. See Abraham v. D.A. of Philadelphia, No. 03-0287 (E.D. Pa Jan. 31, 2003); see also Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547, 553, 87 S.Ct. 1213, 1217 (1967). Therefore, this claim is denied as frivolous and groundless. Because he has already been informed that judges have absolute judicial immunity from suit, we find this claim is also malicious under the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) (2003).

ORDER

AND NOW, this 23rd day of July, 2003, upon consideration of Ahaji Abraham's motion for a writ of habeas corpus and his attempt to initiate a negligence claim against Judge John P. Fullam we allow Abraham to proceed pro-se and it is ORDERED that the negligence suit against Judge John P. Fullam is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE and we find that this cause of action is frivolous and malicious. Abrahams habeas corpus claim is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to his right to refile a proper habeas claim under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2003) upon the proper forms and the Clerk of the Court is directed to furnish said forms to Mr. Abraham.