Willie Perry v. Julianna Boors and Talisa Jenkins

Summary

The United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida adopted a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation recommending dismissal of Willie Perry’s action without prejudice. The court overruled Perry’s objections, concluding that they did not address the pleading, Bivens, state-actor, or sovereign-immunity deficiencies identified in the report, and directed the clerk to close the case.

Holdings

1. When a party objects to a magistrate judge's findings, the district court must make a de novo determination of the portions of the report to which objection is made and may accept, reject, or modify the magistrate judge's recommendations.
2. Plaintiff's objections did not warrant altering the report and recommendation because they did not address the legal and pleading deficiencies identified by the magistrate judge.
3. The action was properly dismissed without prejudice because the amended complaint was a shotgun pleading after plaintiff had already been granted leave to amend, the asserted Bivens claim under the Fourteenth Amendment was not recognized, plaintiff did not allege that defendants were state actors, and plaintiff did not allege a waiver of sovereign immunity.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the district court should conduct de novo review of the portions of the magistrate judge's report and recommendation challenged by plaintiff's objections.
2. Whether plaintiff's objections addressed the deficiencies identified in the report and recommendation sufficiently to prevent dismissal.
3. Whether the action should be dismissed without prejudice because the amended complaint was a shotgun pleading, the asserted Fourteenth Amendment Bivens claim was not recognized, defendants were not alleged to be state actors, and sovereign immunity was not alleged to have been waived.

Disposition

dismissed