APRIL MAE HOWELL v. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI, et al.

• Court: District Court, N.D. Mississippi
• Decided: October 22, 2025
• Docket: 1:24-cv-00057
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI ABERDEEN DIVISION

APRIL MAE HOWELL PLAINTIFF

v. CAUSE NO. 1:24-CV-57-SA-DAS

STATE OF MISSISSIPPI, et al. DEFENDANTS

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

On May 7, 2025, Magistrate Judge Sanders entered a Report and Recommendation [24], wherein he recommended that most of the Plaintiff’s claims in this case be dismissed as frivolous, with one caveat as to a portion of Claims Seven and Eight of the Complaint [1]. Magistrate Judge Sanders also recommended “that the plaintiff be barred from filing any further action without first obtaining leave to file from the chief judge of this court.” [24] at p. 41. The reasons for Magistrate Judge Sanders’ recommendations are fully articulated in the 42-page Report and Recommendation [24]. The deadline to object to the Report and Recommendation [24] has long passed, and Howell has not responded. “With respect to those portions of the report and recommendation to which no objections were raised, the Court need only satisfy itself that there is no plain error on the face of the record.” Gauthier v. Union Pac. R.R. Co., 644 F. Supp. 2d 824, 828 (E.D. Tex. 2009) (citing Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1428–29 (5th Cir. 1996)). The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation [24] and the record as a whole. Having done so, the Court agrees with Magistrate Judge Sanders’ recommendations. There is no plain error on the face of the record. The Report and Recommendation [24] is ADOPTED IN FULL. With regard to the portion of Claims Seven and Eight that allege that the City of Amory wrongly denied Howell utilities to her grandmother’s home, Howell shall have fourteen days from today’s date to file an amended complaint. That amended complaint shall address the inadequacies addressed in the Report and Recommendation [24] and shall name only the appropriate Defendants allegedly involved in the facts underlying that claim. Should Howell fail to comply, this case will

be dismissed without further notice. The Court also adopts Magistrate Judge Sanders’ sanction recommendation. Other than a potential amended complaint in this case in accordance with the directives set forth in the Report and Recommendation [24] and this Order, April Mae Howell is hereby BARRED from filing any further action in this Court without first obtaining leave to file from the Chief Judge of this Court. SO ORDERED, this the 22nd day of October, 2025. /s/ Sharion Aycock SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE