From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Banks v. Hayward

United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Jan 9, 2007
Civil Action No. 06-1572 (W.D. Pa. Jan. 9, 2007)

Summary

stating that the suit should be dismissed as frivolous/malicious pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(B)

Summary of this case from Banks v. Langford

Opinion

Civil Action No. 06-1572.

January 9, 2007


ORDER


AND NOW, this 9th day of Jan 2007, after the plaintiff, Frederick Banks, filed an action in the above-captioned case, and after a Report and Recommendation was filed by the United States Magistrate Judge granting the parties ten days after being served with a copy to file written objections thereto, and objections having been filed by plaintiff, and upon independent review of the record, and upon consideration of the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, which is adopted as the opinion of this Court,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, prior to service, the complaint is dismissed pursuant to the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA), as frivolous and/or for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to Rule 4(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, if the plaintiff desires to appeal from this Order he must do so within thirty (30) days by filing a notice of appeal as provided in Rule 3, Fed R.App.P.


Summaries of

Banks v. Hayward

United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Jan 9, 2007
Civil Action No. 06-1572 (W.D. Pa. Jan. 9, 2007)

stating that the suit should be dismissed as frivolous/malicious pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(B)

Summary of this case from Banks v. Langford
Case details for

Banks v. Hayward

Case Details

Full title:FREDERICK BANKS, Plaintiff, v. RONALD W. HAYWARD, Esq., DAVID S. SHRAGER…

Court:United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania

Date published: Jan 9, 2007

Citations

Civil Action No. 06-1572 (W.D. Pa. Jan. 9, 2007)

Citing Cases

Lopresti v. Cnty. of Lehigh

In support of this argument, she cites Luben Industries, Inc. v. United States, 707 F.2d 1037, 1040 (9th Cir.…

Donelson v. Prado

Dismissal under that standard constitutes a "final judgment on the merits" for preclusion purposes. See…