Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

Cobbs v. Highhouse

United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Greenville Division

March 24, 2016

Al-Rad Cobbs, # XXXXXX-XXXX, Plaintiff,
v.
D. J. Highhouse-T954 and Sergio Reyes, Defendants.

REPORT OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE

KEVIN F. McDONALD, District Judge.

This is a civil action filed pro se by a detainee confined at a local detention center. Pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Civil Rule 73.02(B)(2)(d) (D.S.C.), the undersigned is authorized to review such complaints for relief and submit findings and recommendations to the district judge. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e); 1915A. For the reasons that follow, the undersigned recommends that the district judge dismiss the complaint in this case without prejudice and without issuance and service of process.

BACKGROUND

The plaintiff is a pretrial detainee at the Greenville County Detention Center[1] and is a resident of Greenville, South Carolina. Defendant D.J. Highhouse is a South Carolina Highway Patrolman, and the defendant Sergio Reyes is a resident of Spartanburg, South Carolina.

The plaintiff's complaint concerns an automobile accident that occurred on or around April 13, 2013, in Greenville, South Carolina. In his complaint, the plaintiff alleges (verbatim):

On the above date 4/13/213 and time 8:00 pm. I got hit by a car by a Maxcan his name is Sergio Reyes. The state trooper name DJ highhouse pulls up gets out of his car runs over to me. I stood up he knee me in my chease back down on the ground started checking me After I got hit by a car. The guy Segio Reyes had hit me came over to us and sad way or you handing this guy like that. Anyway the state trooper and Sergio Reyes walk over to his car got his information down and let him go with out know driving license. He was driving a burgandy Bonnivill made by chev. The year 2012, Body 43, License Plate 3N335? And heres my Police Report? And this were Sergio Reyes work at gsp transportation-phone number (843) 6266527 Location, 10820 Kings Hwy. myrtle beach sc 29572. And his home phone number Sergio Reyes (530) 513-8594
When my time is up this is Al-Rad Cobbs address, 606 Pendleton Street Greenville, S.C. 29601 the end of 216 I be getting out of the Detention Center
I would like the courts to look at my case carefully and make the right decession as soon as possible.

(Doc. 1 at 2-3).

The plaintiff attached a copy of the accident report to his complaint (doc. 1-1 at 1). The accident report reflects that the plaintiff was under the influence of alcohol and at fault in the accident ( id. ).

STANDARD OF REVIEW

Under established local procedure in this judicial district, a careful review has been made of the pro se complaint pursuant to the procedural provisions of 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915, 1915A and the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1996, and in light of the following precedents: Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 324-25 (1989); Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97 (1976); Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519 (1972); Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147 (4th Cir.1978). The complaint has been filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, the in forma pauperis statute. This statute authorizes the District Court to dismiss a case if it is satisfied that the action "fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted, " is "frivolous or malicious, ' or "seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief." 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).

This court is required to liberally construe pro se pleadings, Estelle, 429 U.S. at 97, holding them to a less stringent standard than those drafted by attorneys, Hughes v. Rowe, 449 U.S. 5 (1980) ( per curiam ). The mandated liberal construction afforded pro se pleadings means that if the court can reasonably read the pleadings to state a valid claim on which the plaintiff could prevail, it should do so, but a district court may not rewrite a pleading to "conjure up questions never squarely presented" to the court. Beaudett v. City of Hampton, 775 F.2d 1274, 1278 (4th Cir.1985). However, the requirement of liberal construction does not mean that the court can ignore a clear failure in the pleading to allege facts which set forth a claim currently cognizable in a federal district court. Weller v. ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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