Summary
determining that a plaintiff's claim that a law librarian violated a right to privacy by "copying a court order that was already public record" was "frivolous on [its] face"
Summary of this case from Greisdorf v. GovernorOpinion
CASE NO. 1:09-cv-00224-MP-AK.
January 20, 2010
ORDER
This matter is before the Court Doc. 7, the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, recommending that the complaint in this case be dismissed as frivolous. The plaintiff filed objections, Doc. 8, and a motion for preliminary injunction, Doc. 9, both of which the Court has reviewed.
The Plaintiff was allowed to access the prison law library on a priority basis due to a pending court deadline, as required by Fla. Admin. Code § 33-501.301(3)(f). As part of the procedures for providing such priority use, the law librarian made a photocopy of the order of Magistrate Judge Kornblum which set the deadline that triggered the Plaintiff's priority use of the law library. Plaintiff now claims that his rights under the " First Amendment of the United States Constitution, Privacy Clause . . . was violated when Defendant [law librarian] made a copy of Plaintiff's court ordered deadline against the wishes of the plaintiff." Doc. 1, p. 7 (Section VI, Statement of Claims). In other words, Plaintiff claims that by copying a court order that was already public record, the law librarian somehow invaded his right to privacy. He seeks compensatory damages in the amount of $500,000, declaratory damages [sic] in the amount of $500,000, and punitive damages in the amount of $5,000,000. Plaintiff's claims are frivolous on their face, and the Magistrate Judge properly recommends dismissal with prejudice. It is hereby
It should be noted that Plaintiff does not claim that the order that was copied had any of his legal thoughts or strategies written in the margins. Also, although the Magistrate Judge considered the issue of access to the courts, and found no actionable interference therewith, the Plaintiff himself failed to raise such issue in the Complaint. In any event, the Court would agree with the Magistrate Judge that no actionable interference with access to the court has been alleged here.
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:
DONE AND ORDERED
1. The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is adopted and incorporated herein.
2. Plaintiff's complaint (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED with prejudice as frivolous and for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). The motion for preliminary injunction, Doc. 9, is likewise DENIED.
3. The Clerk of Court is directed to note on the docket that this cause was dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) and constitutes a strike within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).