Jeffrey W. Holton v. Nicholas A. Sudzina, Kimberly Jenkins, Stephanie Sullivan, John Does 1-X (General Counsel), and John Does Y-Z (IT Department)

Summary

The United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida adopted a magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation, overruled Jeffrey Holton’s objections, denied his motion to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismissed his amended complaint without prejudice. The court held that the challenged scheduling-related conduct was protected by quasi-judicial immunity and that the alleged mishandling of a Florida public records request did not support a federal claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Holton was granted twenty-one days to file a second amended complaint.

Holdings

1. Officials performing functions intimately associated with the judicial process are entitled to quasi-judicial immunity, and the challenged acts of scheduling hearings and communicating with counsel about hearing dates fell within that protection.
2. The alleged violation of Florida's Public Records Act did not state a cognizable § 1983 claim because it did not implicate a right secured by federal law.
3. Declaratory judgments and injunctions are remedies rather than independent causes of action, and Ex parte Young likewise does not create an independent cause of action.
4. A pro se plaintiff must generally receive at least one opportunity to amend before dismissal with prejudice; Holton was granted one final opportunity to file a sufficient second amended complaint.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Jenkins and Sudzina were entitled to quasi-judicial immunity for alleged acts involving the scheduling of court hearings and communications concerning hearing dates.
2. Whether Holton stated a cognizable First Amendment retaliation claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 based on the alleged deficient handling of his request for records under Florida's Public Records Act.
3. Whether Holton's separate count seeking declaratory and injunctive relief stated an independent cause of action.
4. Whether the amended complaint should be dismissed with or without prejudice and whether Holton should receive leave to amend.

Disposition

dismissed