Opinion

Dugas v. The United States Of America

Court
District Court, S.D. Texas
Filed
Feb 21, 2020
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 31.9%

The opinion

□ Southern District of Texas

ENTERED

February 21, 2020

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT David J. Bradley, Clerk

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION

JARVIS DUGAS, §

§

Plaintiff, §

VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:19-CV-302

§

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et §

al., §

§

Defendants.

ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION

Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Jason B. Libby’s Memorandum and

Recommendation (M&R), entered on January 30, 2020. (D.E. 15). The M&R recommends

that the Court deny Plaintiffs motions to reconsider the dismissal of this case. (D.E. 9, 10,

11, 12). Plaintiff timely filed a motion to reconsider the M&R, which the Court interprets

as objections to the M&R, on February 13, 2020. (D.E. 17).

Plaintiffs objections challenge the outcome of the orders and recommendations

issued by the Magistrate Judge and this Court in this case. Plaintiff does so by raising the

same arguments he has made throughout this case, focusing primarily on the argument that

Judge Ellington lacks immunity. (D.E. 17, p. 4). Plaintiff also attempts to relitigate claims

raised in previous cases numbered 2:17-CV-48 and 2:19-CV-16. See (D.E. 17). After

careful review, the Court finds that neither the motions to reconsider nor the objections

clearly establish a manifest error of law or fact or present newly discovered evidence. See

Schiller v. Physicians Res. Group, Inc., 342 F.3d 563, 567 (Sth Cir. 2003). Plaintiff has

presented nothing to call into question this Court’s order of dismissal. Accordingly, the

1/2

Court OVERRULES Plaintiff's objections.

Thus, after reviewing the facts, conclusions of law, and recommendation set forth

in the M&R, as well as Plaintiffs objections and all other relevant documents in the record,

and having made a de novo disposition of the portions of the M&R to which the objections

were directed, the Court OVERRULES Plaintiffs objections. The Court ADOPTS as its

own the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge. Per the Court’s previous order

(D.E. 8), this case remains dismissed with prejudice.

SIGNED and ORDERED this Z/ $ day of Februayy 2020.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2/2

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.