Reevis v. Spokane County Superior Court

E.D. Washington

Reevis v. Spokane County Superior Court

DecidedJune 8, 2021

Docket2:20-cv-00488

StatusUnknown

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

Bluebook

Reevis v. Spokane County Superior Court, (E.D. Wash. 2021).

Pincite

Opinion

2 FILED IN THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT 3 EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON Jun 08, 2021 4 SEAN F. MCAVOY, CLERK 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 6

7 CHARLES JOSEPH REEVIS, also known as NO: 2:20-CV-00488-RMP 8 champion of all champions baby, ORDER DISMISSING ACTION 9 Plaintiff,

10 v.

11 SPOKANE COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, 12 Defendant. 13

14 By Order filed March 31, 2021, the Court granted Plaintiff Charles Joseph 15 Reevis thirty days to voluntarily dismiss this action. ECF No. 8. The Court found 16 that Mr. Reevis’s pro se submission, a two-page Standard Form 95 (“SF 95”), filed 17 while he was incarcerated at the Spokane County Corrections Center, did not 18 support a federal tort claim. Id. at 4–5. Consequently, Plaintiff’s claims were 19 subject to dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See McNeil v. United 20 States, 508 U.S. 106, 110, 113 (1993). 21 Plaintiff is currently housed at Comprehensive Health Care - Yakima 1 Competency Restoration, and is proceeding in forma pauperis, but without the 2 obligation to pay the $350.00 filing fee for this action. ECF No. 7. Plaintiff did

3 not avail himself of the opportunity to voluntarily dismiss this action. 4 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED: 5 1. This action is DISMISSED without prejudice for lack of subject matter

6 jurisdiction. 7 2. Based on the Court’s reading of Hoffmann v. Pulido, 928 F.3d 1147, 8 1152 (9th Cir. 2019), this dismissal will NOT count as a “strike” under 9 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).

10 3. This case is DISMISSED and CLOSED. 11 IT IS SO ORDERED. The District Court Clerk is DIRECTED to enter 12 this Order, provide a copy to Plaintiff and CLOSE the file. The Court certifies

13 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal of this Order would not be 14 taken in good faith and would lack any arguable basis in law or fact. 15 DATED June 8, 2021. 16

s/ Rosanna Malouf Peterson 17 ROSANNA MALOUF PETERSON United States District Judge 18

19 20 21

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

2 FILED IN THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT 3 EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON Jun 08, 2021 4 SEAN F. MCAVOY, CLERK 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 6

7 CHARLES JOSEPH REEVIS, also known as NO: 2:20-CV-00488-RMP 8 champion of all champions baby, ORDER DISMISSING ACTION 9 Plaintiff,

10 v.

11 SPOKANE COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, 12 Defendant. 13

14 By Order filed March 31, 2021, the Court granted Plaintiff Charles Joseph 15 Reevis thirty days to voluntarily dismiss this action. ECF No. 8. The Court found 16 that Mr. Reevis’s pro se submission, a two-page Standard Form 95 (“SF 95”), filed 17 while he was incarcerated at the Spokane County Corrections Center, did not 18 support a federal tort claim. Id. at 4–5. Consequently, Plaintiff’s claims were 19 subject to dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See McNeil v. United 20 States, 508 U.S. 106, 110, 113 (1993). 21 Plaintiff is currently housed at Comprehensive Health Care - Yakima 1 Competency Restoration, and is proceeding in forma pauperis, but without the 2 obligation to pay the $350.00 filing fee for this action. ECF No. 7. Plaintiff did

3 not avail himself of the opportunity to voluntarily dismiss this action. 4 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED: 5 1. This action is DISMISSED without prejudice for lack of subject matter

6 jurisdiction. 7 2. Based on the Court’s reading of Hoffmann v. Pulido, 928 F.3d 1147, 8 1152 (9th Cir. 2019), this dismissal will NOT count as a “strike” under 9 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).

10 3. This case is DISMISSED and CLOSED. 11 IT IS SO ORDERED. The District Court Clerk is DIRECTED to enter 12 this Order, provide a copy to Plaintiff and CLOSE the file. The Court certifies

13 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal of this Order would not be 14 taken in good faith and would lack any arguable basis in law or fact. 15 DATED June 8, 2021. 16

s/ Rosanna Malouf Peterson 17 ROSANNA MALOUF PETERSON United States District Judge 18

19 20 21

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Reevis v. Spokane County Superior Court, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reevis-v-spokane-county-superior-court-waed-2021.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack