Poulson v. Park, No. 9:2017cv00143 - Document 11 (D. Mont. 2018)
Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. Signed by Judge Dana L. Christensen on 1/31/2018. (APP) Copy to Poulson
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Poulson v. Park Doc. 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA MISSOULA DIVISION KERMIT TY POULSON, CV 17-143-M-DLC-JCL Plaintiff, ORDER vs. KENNETH R. PARK, Defendant. United States Magistrate Judge Jeremiah C. Lynch entered his Order and Findings and Recommendations in this case on October 16, 201 7, recommending that this matter be dismissed for both failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted and for seeking monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief. (Doc. 3 at 5.) Plaintiff Kermit Ty Poulson ("Poulson") timely filed objections to the Findings and Recommendations. (Doc. 9.) Consequently, Poulson is entitled to a de novo review of those findings and recommendations to which he specifically objects. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l)(C). This Court reviews for clear error those findings and recommendations to which no party objects. See McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore Bus. Mach., Inc., 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 -1- Dockets.Justia.com (9th Cir. 1981); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). Clear error exists ifthe Court is left with a "definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed." United States v. Syrax, 235 F.3d 422, 427 (9th Cir. 2000) (citations omitted). Judge Lynch concluded, and this Court agrees, that the conduct of Defendant Kenneth R. Park ("Park") upon which Poulson predicates both his federal and state claims, taken as true, fall under the umbrella of absolute immunity afforded to Park as a prosecutor. (Doc. 3 at 4.) Further, Poulson's allegation of slander fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted as the allegation does not include slander as defined by Montana law. (Doc. 3 at 4-5.) Consequently, Poulson's case should be dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) and (iii). Poulson's petulant objection fails to present any new evidence or law supporting his claims, despite his superficial claims to the contrary. (Doc. 9 at 1-3.) Having failed to specifically object to any of Judge Lynch's Finding and Recommendations, this Court reviews the record for clear error. See McDonnell Douglas Corp., 656 F.2d at 1313. Finding none, IT IS ORDERED that Judge Lynch's Findings and Recommendations (Doc. 3) are ADOPTED IN FULL and this case is DISMISSED pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) and (iii). -2- IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court will enter judgment in favor of Defendant and against Plaintiff in this case. DATED this ~iday of January, 2018. Dana L. Christensen, Chief Judge United States District Court -3-
]]>
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.
