Adams
v.
Hart

This case is not covered by Casetext's citator
United States District Court, M.D. GeorgiaNov 15, 2011
NO. 5:11-CV-436 (MTT). (M.D. Ga. Nov. 15, 2011)

Cases citing this case

How cited

  • Adams v. Bishop

    …Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), a prisoner who has filed three or more complaints that have been dismissed…

lock 1 Citing casekeyboard_arrow_right

NO. 5:11-CV-436 (MTT).

November 15, 2011.


ORDER


On November 8, 2011, this Court dismissed pro se Plaintiff ALLEN ALPHONZO ADAM’S complaint filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Doc. 8). Plaintiff has filed three post-judgment motions: (1) “Motion for Objection,” which this Court docketed as a motion to reconsider (Doc. 9); (2) “Motion for Amended Complaint an[] Procedure” (Doc. 10); and (3) “Motion for Dismiss Defendant Counsel in Opposite Motion Pursuant[] in Rule 12(b)” (Doc. 11). Although much of Plaintiff’s allegations in his motions are unintelligible, he fails allege any facts justifying this Court’s reopening this case. Plaintiff largely complains that dismissal was premature, e.g., because discovery had not occurred. In contrast to Plaintiff’s assertion, this Court is required to screen prisoner complaints prior to their being served on the defendants and dismiss a complaint that is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motions are hereby DENIED.

SO ORDERED.