Hugunin v. Winmill

E.D. Arkansas

Hugunin v. Winmill

DecidedOctober 3, 2023

Docket4:23-cv-00886

StatusUnknown

This text of Hugunin v. Winmill (Hugunin v. Winmill) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Arkansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hugunin v. Winmill, (E.D. Ark. 2023).

Pincite

Opinion

IN TEHAES UTENRITNE DDI SVTISAITOENS O DFIS ATRRKICATN SCAOSURT CENTRAL DIVISION HARVEY WILLIAM HUGUNIN PLAINTIFF V. No. 4:23-CV-00886-BRW JUDGE D. LYNN WINMILL DEFENDANT ORDER A district court has the authority to dismiss a case sua sponte for failure to state a claim.1

Plaintiff alleges that Defendant, a federal judge in Idaho, violated his constitutional right to a jury trial. First, Defendant is entitled to immunity.2 Second, Plaintiff’s Complaint is nonsensical, frivolous, and states no cause of action against Defendant for which relief may be granted. Accordingly, this case is DISMISSED. The motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. No. 1) is DENIED. Plaintiff recently filed numerous motions to proceed in forma pauperis along with frivolous complaints in the Eastern District of Arkansas. He has a history of doing this in other courts as well.3 If Plaintiff continues this practice, I may direct the Clerk of the Court to stop

accepting his filings. IT IS SO ORDERED this 3rd day of October, 2023. Billy Roy Wilson UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 1See Smith v. Boyd, 945 F.2d 1041 (8th Cir. 1991).

2Schottel v. Young, 687 F.3d 370, 373 (8th Cir. 2012) (holding that a judge is immune from suit, except for non-judicial actions or for actions taken absent all jurisdiction). 3See Hugunin v. Nye, No. 1:20-CV-00053, 2020 WL 4043983, at *1 (E.D. Tenn. June 5, 2020) (noting that seven frivolous cases had been filed in the E.D. Tenn. and he is now a restricted filer); Hugunin v. Idaho, No. 1:19-CV-480-BLW, 2020 WL 1033568, at *1 (D. Idaho Mar. 3, 2020).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

IN TEHAES UTENRITNE DDI SVTISAITOENS O DFIS ATRRKICATN SCAOSURT CENTRAL DIVISION HARVEY WILLIAM HUGUNIN PLAINTIFF V. No. 4:23-CV-00886-BRW JUDGE D. LYNN WINMILL DEFENDANT ORDER A district court has the authority to dismiss a case sua sponte for failure to state a claim.1

Plaintiff alleges that Defendant, a federal judge in Idaho, violated his constitutional right to a jury trial. First, Defendant is entitled to immunity.2 Second, Plaintiff’s Complaint is nonsensical, frivolous, and states no cause of action against Defendant for which relief may be granted. Accordingly, this case is DISMISSED. The motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. No. 1) is DENIED. Plaintiff recently filed numerous motions to proceed in forma pauperis along with frivolous complaints in the Eastern District of Arkansas. He has a history of doing this in other courts as well.3 If Plaintiff continues this practice, I may direct the Clerk of the Court to stop

accepting his filings. IT IS SO ORDERED this 3rd day of October, 2023. Billy Roy Wilson UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 1See Smith v. Boyd, 945 F.2d 1041 (8th Cir. 1991).

2Schottel v. Young, 687 F.3d 370, 373 (8th Cir. 2012) (holding that a judge is immune from suit, except for non-judicial actions or for actions taken absent all jurisdiction). 3See Hugunin v. Nye, No. 1:20-CV-00053, 2020 WL 4043983, at *1 (E.D. Tenn. June 5, 2020) (noting that seven frivolous cases had been filed in the E.D. Tenn. and he is now a restricted filer); Hugunin v. Idaho, No. 1:19-CV-480-BLW, 2020 WL 1033568, at *1 (D. Idaho Mar. 3, 2020).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Hugunin v. Winmill, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hugunin-v-winmill-ared-2023.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack