Pilch v. Freeman
Filing
32
ORDER mooting 25 Motion; mooting 27 Motion; mooting 29 Motion; mooting 6 Motion to Reassign Case; granting 8 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction; mooting 11 Motion for Summary Judgment; mooting 13 Motion; mooting 18 Motion; mooting 21 Motion and mooting 3 Motion to Consolidate Cases. Signed by Senior Judge Malcolm J. Howard on 12/12/2011. (Heath, D.)
<![CDATA[
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
WESTERN DIVISION
NO. 5:11-CV-352-H
DONNA PILCH,
Plaintiff,
v.
ORDER
LORRIN FREEMAN,
Defendant.
This matter
dismiss
along
before
the
renewed
is before
with
several
court
motions
are
for
the
court on defendant's motion
motions
defendant's
sanctions.
filed
by plaintiff.
motion
for
Defendant
several of plaintiff's motions.
has
Also
sanctions
responded
The plaintiff did not
to
and
to
file a
response to defendant's motion to dismiss.
This
is one of
plaintiff,
from
a
Plaintiff
ยงยง
1983,
plaintiff
five pro se actions recently filed by the
Donna Pilch,
DWI
conviction
brings
this
1985 and 1986.
claims
Superior Court,
that
against various officials,
plaintiff
action
received
pursuant
in
to
all stemming
state
Title
42
court.
U.S.C.
In a series of conclusory allegations,
defendant,
violated state
the
Wake
and federal
County
Clerk
of
recordkeeping laws,
used
fake
and
fraudulent
court
documents
Administrative Off ice of Courts,
allow
with
probable
the
cause
hearings
Automated Criminal
not
approved
issued false
on
the
arrests,
did not
cases,
tampered
misdemeanor
Infractions
by
System,
and
failed
to
prevent the use of fake court documents and false arrests.
The
court
has
carefully
reviewed
this
matter,
including
defendant's motion to dismiss and memorandum in support thereof,
as well as plaintiff's various motions.
The
court
finds
that
plaintiff's complaint should be dismissed for the reasons stated
in the defendant's motion to dismiss and memorandum in support
thereof.
Most,
if not all,
of plaintiff's claims are barred by
the doctrine of sovereign immunity.
are
not
barred
by
sovereign
Furthermore,
immunity,
even if they
plaintiff's
conclusory
allegations are wholly without merit or basis in law or fact and
therefore
granted.
fail
See
to
Fed.
state
R.
Civ.
a
claim
P.
upon
12 (b) (6) .
which
relief
be
alleges
Plaintiff
may
no
facts against defendant that state a claim which is plausible on
its
face.
Plaintiff
cannot
appeal
or
attack
a
state-court
judgment in federal court. District of Columbia Court of Appeals
v.
Feldman,
460 U.S.
determinations
462,
can be
Plainti ff' s claims are,
doctrine.
476
(1983)
obtained only
therefore,
See Exxon Mobil Corp.
2
("Review of
in
[the
[state-court]
Supreme
Court].")
barred by the Rooker- Feldman
v.
Saudi Basic
Indus.
Corp.,
544 U.S.
280,
284
(2005)
(holding that Rooker-Feldman doctrine
bars federal jurisdiction where a party to a state-court action
files suit in federal court complaining of an injury caused by
the
state - court
that judgment)
220
(5th
Cir.
plaintiff
may
i
judgment
Hagerty v.
1984)
not
Finally,
seeking
seek
a
review
and
Succession of Clement,
(invoking
simply by casting his
action") .
and
the
reversal
settled
of
state
complaint in the
plaintiff
failed
to
rule
court
form of a
effect
of
749 F.2d 217,
"well
a
rej ection
that
a
judgment
civil rights
proper
service
upon the defendant, as detailed in defendant's memorandum.
The court has reviewed plaintiff's motions for leave to add
a defendant and finds them to be futile.
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons,
defendant's motion to dismiss is
granted, and plaintiff's complaint is dismissed in its entirety.
All
remaining
motions,
except
3
for
defendant's
motions
for
sanctions
[DE #16 and #24]
are denied.
The court will rule on
the motions for sanctions by separate order.
1V\
This ~ay of December 2011.
At Greenville, NC
#26
4
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
