Gaddis v. Bar Association, The, No. 1:2021cv00587 - Document 4 (N.D. Ala. 2021)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge R David Proctor on 6/21/2021. (KAM)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Gaddis v. Bar Association, The Doc. 4 FILED 2021 Jun-21 PM 02:21 U.S. DISTRICT COURT N.D. OF ALABAMA UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA EASTERN DIVISION THOMAS GADDIS, Plaintiff, v. THE BAR ASSOCIATION, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 1:21-cv-00587-RDP-SGC MEMORANDUM OPINION On May 26, 2021, the Magistrate Judge entered a Report and Recommendation recommending the claims asserted by Thomas Gaddis in this action be dismissed. (Doc. 2). The Report and Recommendation noted that while it was unclear whether Gaddis asserted claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 or sought habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (Id.). Nevertheless, the Magistrate Judge recommended that his claims were subject to dismissal under both statutes. (Id.). Gaddis responded by completing and filing a form petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (Doc. 3). Although his initial pleading named “The Bar Association” as the sole defendant, the more recent filing names Talladega County Sheriff Jimmy Kilgore as the only respondent. (Doc. 3). Gaddis’s most recent filing clarifies that he seeks habeas relief pursuant to § 2254. However, whether construed as an amended petition or as objections to the Report and Recommendation, Gaddis’s claims are due to be dismissed for the reasons noted in the Report and Recommendation. Specifically, the Magistrate Judge concluded any habeas claims Gaddis asserted were unexhausted in state court. (Doc. 2 at 4-5). Gaddis’s most recent filing confirms the Magistrate Judge’s conclusion in this regard. (See Doc. 3 at 2 (noting Gaddis did not challenge Dockets.Justia.com his conviction or sentence via direct appeal); id. at 5 (noting Gaddis did not appeal the denial of his state court habeas petition); id. at 6-12 (indicating Gaddis did not fully exhaust his federal habeas claims in Alabama courts)). Indeed, the substance of Gaddis’s filing largely repeats his conclusory allegations that he has been targeted for kidnapping and murder by a group of corrupt Talladega County officials. (Doc. 3 at 6-9). After careful consideration of the record in this case, including the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation and Gaddis’s June 14, 2021 filing (Doc. 3), the court ADOPTS the Report of the Magistrate Judge and ACCEPTS her Recommendations. To the extent Gaddis’s June 14, 2021 filing can be construed as objections, the objections are OVERRULED. (Doc. 3). In accordance with the Recommendation, the court concludes Gaddis’s habeas claims are due to be dismissed as unexhausted. Additionally, for the reasons stated by the Magistrate Judge, a certificate of appealability is due to be denied. (See Doc. 2 at 8). A separate order will be entered. DONE and ORDERED this June 21, 2021. _________________________________ R. DAVID PROCTOR 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.
