Summary
The United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan denied Plaintiff Casey Harmon’s objections to a Report and Recommendation and adopted the recommendation as the opinion of the court. The court dismissed the in forma pauperis complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) and certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Plaintiff's objections demonstrated factual or legal error in the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation.
- Whether the complaint should be dismissed upon initial screening under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).
- Whether the Court should certify under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
Holdings
- The objections were properly denied because they did not address or reveal factual or legal error in the Magistrate Judge's analysis or conclusion.
- The complaint was dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) for the reasons stated in the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, which the Court approved and adopted as its Opinion.
- The Court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal of the decision would not be taken in good faith.
Factual background
Plaintiff alleged civil rights violations arising from his criminal preliminary examination proceeding in state court. The District Court stated that Plaintiff's objections raised additional concerns about the criminal proceeding but did not address or identify error in the grounds for dismissal analyzed by the Magistrate Judge.
Procedural history
Plaintiff filed a civil rights complaint in November 2025 arising from a state-court criminal preliminary examination proceeding. On December 26, 2025, the Magistrate Judge recommended dismissal upon initial screening. The District Court conducted de novo review of the portions to which Plaintiff objected, denied the objections, approved and adopted the Report and Recommendation, dismissed the complaint, and certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.