Gaddis v. Yant et al, No. 1:2016cv01973 - Document 12 (N.D. Ala. 2017)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Abdul K Kallon on 2/10/2017. Copy served on plff on this date. (YMB)

Download PDF
Gaddis v. Yant et al Doc. 12 FILED 2017 Feb-10 PM 02:37 U.S. DISTRICT COURT N.D. OF ALABAMA UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA EASTERN DIVISION THOMAS GADDIS, Plaintiff, v. OFFICER MICHAEL YANT, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil Action Number 1:16-cv-1973-AKK-JEO MEMORANDUM OPINION The magistrate judge filed a report on January 30, 2017, recommending this action be dismissed without prejudice for failing to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). Doc. 10. Thomas Gaddis filed objections to the report and recommendation, stating that the court should hold him to a less stringent standard because of his pro se status, that he does not have access to legal resources, does not understand federal laws and procedures, and is limited by his fifth grade level education. Doc. 11 at 3. However, the magistrate judge did not recommend dismissal for alleged failure to adequately litigate his case; rather, the magistrate judge recommended dismissal because of res judicata, i.e., that Gaddis previously litigated his claims before a court of competent jurisdiction. See doc. 10 at 5–6. Dockets.Justia.com Having carefully reviewed and considered de novo all the materials in the court file, including the report and recommendation and the objections thereto, the magistrate judge’s report is hereby ADOPTED and the recommendation is ACCEPTED. Therefore, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b), this action is due to be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failing to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. A Final Judgment will be entered. DONE the 10th day of February, 2017. _________________________________ ABDUL K. KALLON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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 Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.