From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Walsh v. Walace

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Sep 12, 2016
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:16-1722 (M.D. Pa. Sep. 12, 2016)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:16-1722

09-12-2016

JOHN WALSH, III Plaintiff v. ROBERT WALACE, ESQ., et al., Defendants


( Mannion, D.J. )
(Carlson, M.J.) ORDER

Based on the report of Judge Carlson, (Doc. 3), to which no objections have been filed, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the report is ADOPTED IN ITS ENTIRETY. Plaintiff's complaint, (Doc. 1), is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. See Roy v. Supreme Court of U.S., 484 F.App'x 700, 700 (3d Cir. 2012) (dismissal under Rule 8 is justified if the complaint is not comprehensible). Leave to amend is GRANTED and plaintiff is directed to file an amended complaint as specified in Judge Carlson's report within 21 days of the date of this Order. The clerk of court is directed to recommit this case to Judge Carlson for further proceedings.

As Judge Carlson finds, Walsh fails to allege how the denial of a permit to protest on Lackawanna County Court property due to his failure to obtain required liability insurance is a violation of his First Amendment rights. As Judge Carlson points out, (Doc. 3, at 13), "narrowly-tailored and content neutral insurance requirements relating to the use of public forums may not offend the Constitution." (citing iMatter Utah v. Njord, 980 F. Supp. 2d 1356, 1370 (D.Utah 2013), aff'd, 774 F.3d 1258 (10th Cir. 2014).
Moreover, as Judge Carlson finds, Judge Michael Barrasse is protected by absolute immunity for all judicial acts except those made in the clear absence of jurisdiction. Cleavinger v. Saxner, 474 U.S. 193, 199, 106 S.Ct. 496, 88 L.Ed.2d 507 (1985); Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349, 35667, 98 S.Ct. 1099, 55 L.Ed.2d 331 (1978); Clark v. Conahan, 737 F.Supp.2d 239, 255256 (M.D.Pa. 2010). "Judicial immunity provides complete immunity from suit, not merely from an ultimate assessment of damages." Smith v. Laster,787 F.Supp.2d at 319 (citing Mireles v. Waco, 502 U.S. 9, 11, 112 S.Ct. 286, 116 L.Ed.2d 9 (1991)).

Insofar as Walsh filed an addendum to his complaint to add the City of Scranton as a defendant and to add more violations of his rights under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments, (Doc. 4), this addendum must be incorporated in any amended complaint that Walsh files. Also, Walsh is advised that any constitutional claims against municipal defendants must comport with Monell v. Dept. of Soc. Servs., New York City, 436 U.S. 658, 694-95, 98 S.Ct. 2018 (1978). See Carswell v. Bor. of Homestead, 381 F.3d 235, 244 (3d Cir. 2004). --------

/s/ _________

MALACHY E. MANNION

United States District Judge Date: September 12, 2016
O:\Mannion\shared\ORDERS - DJ\CIVIL ORDERS\2016 ORDERS\16-1722-01.wpd


Summaries of

Walsh v. Walace

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Sep 12, 2016
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:16-1722 (M.D. Pa. Sep. 12, 2016)
Case details for

Walsh v. Walace

Case Details

Full title:JOHN WALSH, III Plaintiff v. ROBERT WALACE, ESQ., et al., Defendants

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Date published: Sep 12, 2016

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:16-1722 (M.D. Pa. Sep. 12, 2016)

Citing Cases

Jenn-Ching Luo v. Owen J. Roberts Sch. Dist.

Mr. Luo is admonished not to include such scurrilous statements as detailed in footnote seven in any further…