From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Williams v. Superior Court of L. A. Cnty.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jun 19, 2015
Case No. CV-13-7759-GW(JCGx) (C.D. Cal. Jun. 19, 2015)

Opinion

Case No. CV-13-7759-GW(JCGx)

06-19-2015

ALVIN E. WILLIAMS, et al., Plaintiffs, v. SUPERIOR COURT OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY, et al., Defendants.


ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE, DECLARING PLAINTIFFS "VEXATIOUS LITIGANTS," AND DECLINING TO ISSUE MONETARY SANCTIONS

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the Complaint, the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, and the remaining record. No objections to the Report and Recommendation have been filed.

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that:

1. The Report and Recommendation is approved and accepted, with the following amendments:

1. Page 3, line 3: < the Section > is amended to read < the California Code of Civil Procedure § >.

2. Page 3, line 4: < 990 > is corrected to read < 998 >.

3. Page 5, lines 19-20: < among the lemon law proceedings, Williams I, and Williams II > is amended to read < as between Williams I and Williams II >.
4. Page 5, lines 22-23: < the claims in the lemon law action, Williams I, and Williams II are > is amended to read < the claims in Williams I and Williams II are >.

5. Page 6, fnt. 4, line 27: < its > is amended to read < the >.

6. Page 8, line 1: < Plaintiffs specifically request the Court to > is amended to read < Plaintiffs specifically (and only) request the Court to >.

2. Judgment be entered dismissing this action with prejudice.

3. Plaintiffs are deemed "vexatious litigants." They are hereby precluded from filing in the Central District of California any litigation that is in any way related to the lemon law action. They are forbidden from filing any federal action against any of the Williams I-II defendants, or their counsel of record, absent the written authorization of a federal judge, to be granted only upon (1) a declaration by Plaintiffs that the matters asserted have never been raised and disposed of on the merits by any court, (2) a showing of good cause, and (3) a posting of security, equal to the defendants' anticipated defense fees and costs, to be awarded to the defendants if Plaintiffs' action is dismissed on grounds of res judicata, Rooker-Feldman, or frivolousness. Plaintiff's shall attach a copy of this order to any action-commencing document filed in federal court.

4. No monetary sanctions shall be issued at this time.

5. The Clerk shall serve copies of this Order and the Judgment on the parties. Dated: This 19th day of June, 2015.

/s/_________

GEORGE H. WU

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Williams v. Superior Court of L. A. Cnty.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jun 19, 2015
Case No. CV-13-7759-GW(JCGx) (C.D. Cal. Jun. 19, 2015)
Case details for

Williams v. Superior Court of L. A. Cnty.

Case Details

Full title:ALVIN E. WILLIAMS, et al., Plaintiffs, v. SUPERIOR COURT OF LOS ANGELES…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Jun 19, 2015

Citations

Case No. CV-13-7759-GW(JCGx) (C.D. Cal. Jun. 19, 2015)