Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

JUDD v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

United States District Court, D. Columbia


October 3, 2005.

KEITH RUSSELL JUDD, Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS, et al., Defendants.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: PAUL FRIEDMAN, District Judge

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This action, brought pro se by a federal prisoner, is before the Court on its initial review of the complaint. The Court is required to screen a prisoner's complaint and dismiss it as soon as practicable if, among other grounds, the complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted or seeks monetary damages from officials who are immune from suit. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a)-(b). The Court will dismiss the complaint on both grounds.*fn1

Plaintiff has filed a "Motion for Relief from Judgment by Independent Action Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P., Rule 60(b); Rules Enabling Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2072; 28 U.S.C. § 1631; 28 U.S.C. § 455(a)." He seeks "relief from the judgment" of conviction entered by the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas. Complaint at 1. As plaintiff has been advised previously, this claim must be pursued by petitioning the sentencing court pursuant to § 2255. See Judd v. United States of America, Civ. Action No. 05-1152 (D.D.C., June 9, 2005); Judd v. United States of America, Civ. Action No. 05-1221 (D.D.C., June 22, 2005). This Court lacks authority to review plaintiff's judgment of conviction.

  Plaintiff also seeks $10 million in damages. Although he lists four individuals as defendants, plaintiff complains only about acts taken by United States District Judge Royal Ferguson. See Complaint at 3-4. Judges are absolutely immune from suit for actions, such as those alleged here, taken in a judicial or quasi-judicial capacity. Forrester v. White, 484 U.S. 219, 225 (1988); Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349, 355-57 (1978); Sindram v. Suda, 986 F.2d 1459, 1460 (D.C. Cir. 1993). As for the other named defendants, plaintiff has made no accusations against them and therefore has failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.

  For the foregoing reasons, the Court, acting sua sponte, dismisses the complaint in its entirety. A separate Order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.

20051003

© 1992-2005 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.