Edwards v. Holmes Law Firm LLC et al, No. 1:2014cv02408 - Document 16 (N.D. Ala. 2015)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OF OPINION Signed by Chief Judge Karon O Bowdre on 12/10/15. (SAC )
Edwards v. Holmes Law Firm LLC et al Doc. 16 FILED 2015 Dec-10 PM 12:46 U.S. DISTRICT COURT N.D. OF ALABAMA UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA EASTERN DIVISION CURTIS WAYNE EDWARDS Plaintiff v. HOLMES LAW FIRM, LLC, et al., Defendants ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 1:14-cv-02408-KOB-HGD MEMORANDUM OF OPINION The magistrate judge filed a report and recommendation on August 11, 2015, recommending that this action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1985(3) be dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1) as frivolous and for failing to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. (Doc. 11). The plaintiff filed objections on September 21, 2015. (Doc. 14). In his objections, the plaintiff continues to make only general and conclusory allegations that a conspiracy existed among the defendants. The plaintiff fails to submit sufficient factual support that the defendants’ conduct was motivated by racial or invidiously discriminatory animus. As such, the court OVERRULES the plaintiff’s Page 1 of 2 Dockets.Justia.com objections. The plaintiff has failed to adequately state a claim for relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1985(3). Having carefully reviewed and considered de novo all the materials in the court file, including the report and recommendation and plaintiff’s objections, the court ADOPTS the magistrate judge’s report and ACCEPTS his recommendation. Therefore, the court finds that the complaint is due to be dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1) as frivolous and for failing to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. The plaintiff’s motion to withdraw his state law claims (doc. 10) is MOOT. The court will enter a separate Final Order. DONE and ORDERED this 10th day of December, 2015. ____________________________________ KARON OWEN BOWDRE CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Page 2 of 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Terms of Service