From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Nickell v. Pleskovich

United States District Court, N.D. Florida, Gainesville Division
Mar 6, 2008
CASE NO. 1:06-cv-00167-MP-AK (N.D. Fla. Mar. 6, 2008)

Opinion

CASE NO. 1:06-cv-00167-MP-AK.

March 6, 2008


ORDER


This matter is before the Court on Doc. 35, Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, recommending that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, Doc. 25, be granted, and that Plaintiff's amended complaint, Doc. 8, be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. The Magistrate Judge filed the Report and Recommendation on Friday, January 4, 2008. The parties have been furnished a copy of the Report and Recommendation and have been afforded an opportunity to file objections. Pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1), this Court must make a de novo review of those portions to which an objection has made.

Plaintiff brings suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that the Defendants violated his civil rights by limiting his access to the prison law library, thereby denying him access to the courts. While incarcerated, Plaintiff sought to file a petition in state court challenging the denial of a formal grievance concerning gain time. Plaintiff requested access to the law library, which was denied, and Plaintiff alleges that this resulted in him being "unable to perform the research necessary in order for him to bring an action in the state court challenging his gain-time award issue . . . in a timely manner." Because Plaintiff cannot show that lack of access to the law library caused him actual injury in the pursuit of a non-frivolous legal claim, the Magistrate recommends that Defendants' motion to dismiss be granted.

In his objections, Plaintiff argues that his complaint does state a claim, since Defendants' actions prevented him from researching his contemplated legal action. As the Magistrate points out, this fails to assert facts that would support Plaintiff's legal claim. Plaintiff does not claim that his petition was denied as untimely or because he did not provide sufficient case law. In fact, Plaintiff never filed a petition in state court, and Plaintiff does not explain how denial of legal research accounts for this failure. Because Plaintiff cannot show that his limited access to the prison law library actually denied him access to the courts, the Court agrees with the Magistrate that Defendants' motion to dismiss must be granted.

Therefore, having considered the Report and Recommendation, and the objections thereto, I have determined that it should be adopted. Accordingly, it is hereby

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

1. The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, Doc. 35, is adopted and incorporated by reference in this order.
2. Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, Doc. 25, is GRANTED, and Plaintiff's amended complaint, Doc. 8, is DISMISSED for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).
DONE AND ORDERED.


Summaries of

Nickell v. Pleskovich

United States District Court, N.D. Florida, Gainesville Division
Mar 6, 2008
CASE NO. 1:06-cv-00167-MP-AK (N.D. Fla. Mar. 6, 2008)
Case details for

Nickell v. Pleskovich

Case Details

Full title:DAVID LEON NICKELL, JR., Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL A. PLESKOVICH, et al.…

Court:United States District Court, N.D. Florida, Gainesville Division

Date published: Mar 6, 2008

Citations

CASE NO. 1:06-cv-00167-MP-AK (N.D. Fla. Mar. 6, 2008)