Opinion
Case No. CV414-127
07-22-2014
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Sylvester Moore, proceeding pro se, brought this "quiet title" and lender liability action against entities involved in the foreclosure of his Liberty County, Georgia property. Doc. 1-1. Illuminating the fact that his complaint is virtually incomprehensible, both defendants move to dismiss Moore's case for failure to state a claim. Docs. 5 & 7. Their motions are unopposed under L.R. 7.5 (no response means no opposition). Finding the motions well supported, they must be GRANTED. Hence, defendants' motion to stay this litigation pending the Court ruling on their dismissal motion (doc. 9) is GRANTED.
Just one example is Count II of his Complaint: "Violation of Contract Also Validation Which Went Unanswered in Support of Accounting Fraud/Securities Fraud Causing a Credit Default Swap and Criminal Intent." Doc. 1-1 at 7. Another is Count III: "Violation Of The Servicer Performance Agreement Also Violation Of Dual Tracking." Id. at 9. Under this Count, he explains that the "defendant(s) violated the Service Performance Agreement due to their poor bookkeeping of accounts, also a violation of the REMIC LAW, which is a Tax Violation under the IRS code, which has criminal intent to defraud the Government, and must be reported to the Comptroller of the Currency in Washington D.C." Id. at 9 ¶ 32.
Judges must liberally construe a pro se litigant's pleading, but "this leniency does not give a court license to serve as de facto counsel for a party, or to rewrite an otherwise deficient pleading in order to sustain an action." Boles v. Riva, 2014 WL 1887376 at * 1 (11th Cir. May 13, 2014) (quotes and cite omitted); Sctry, Fl. Dept. of Corr. v. Baker, 406 F. App'x 416, 422 (11th Cir. 2010). Nor can they confer legitimacy upon the surreal.
SO REPORTED AND RECOMMENDED this 22th day of July, 2014.
__________
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA