Howard Page, Jr. v. The Family Court of the State of Delaware, et al.

• Court: District Court, D. Delaware
• Decided: March 3, 2026
• Docket: 1:25-cv-01546
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE __________________________________________ ) HOWARD PAGE, JR., ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) C.A. No. 25-1546-JLH ) THE FAMILY COURT OF ) THE STATE OF DELAWARE, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) __________________________________________)

MEMORANDUM ORDER

At Wilmington, this 3rd day of March 2026: WHEREAS, Plaintiff Howard Page, Jr., a pretrial detainee at James T. Vaughn Correctional Center (JTVCC), in Smyrna, Delaware, filed a pro se Complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (D.I. 2) and was granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis (D.I. 5); WHEREAS, the Court must dismiss the case sua sponte if it is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief, 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B), 1915A(b); WHEREAS, when assessing whether the Complaint states a claim, the Court accepts the facts alleged in the Complaint as true and draws all reasonable inferences in Plaintiff’s favor, and asks only whether the complaint, liberally construed, contains facts sufficient to state a plausible claim., see Shorter v. United States, 12 F.4th 366, 374 (3d Cir. 2021); WHEREAS, Plaintiff’s Complaint is difficult to decipher but he appears to contend that Defendant Detective Lindsay Coleman testified falsely to a state grand jury, resulting in Plaintiff’s indictment and subsequent arrest, and that Plaintiff’s constitutional rights are being violated in connection with his prosecution in Delaware Family Court; WHEREAS, the Complaint requests (among other things) Plaintiff’s release from state pretrial detention and monetary relief;

WHEREAS, Plaintiff names as Defendants the “The Family Court of the State of Delaware,” the “Clerk of the Courts [of] the Family Court of the State of Delaware,” and Judge Paula T. Ryan, but those Defendants are immune from suit pursuant to judicial immunity and/or Eleventh Amendment immunity, Nemeth v. Off. of Clerk of Superior Ct. of New Jersey, 837 F. App’x 924, 928 (3d Cir. 2020); WHEREAS, Plaintiff fails to allege facts sufficient to state a plausible claim against Defendant “Chief Executive of the Dept. of Family Services”; WHEREAS, the Complaint contains a bare assertion that Defendant Coleman provided false testimony to a grand jury, but the Complaint does not explain what she lied about, nor does it allege any other facts that would suggest a plausible claim against Defendant Coleman; and

WHEREAS, to the extent Plaintiff seeks release based on alleged state actions resulting in his current pretrial confinement (as opposed to the conditions of his confinement), Plaintiff cannot seek relief from this Court, see Younger v. Harris. 401 U.S. 37, 54 (1971) (explaining that federal courts cannot interfere with ongoing state judicial proceedings that implicate important state interests and afford an adequate opportunity to raise federal claims);

2 NOW, THEREFORE, the Complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B), 1915A(b) because it fails to state a claim and because it seeks relief from defendants who are immune. Plaintiff granted leave to file an Amended Complaint on or before April 2, 2026. \ Font Jewhifer Hall United Sta istrict Judge