From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cox v. United States

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Mar 29, 2021
CASE NO.: 20-62372-CIV-MIDDLEBROOKS/Otazo-Reyes (S.D. Fla. Mar. 29, 2021)

Summary

dismissing complaint with “incomprehensible and unsupported assertions”

Summary of this case from Freeman v. Ala. Dep't of Revenue

Opinion

CASE NO.: 20-62372-CIV-MIDDLEBROOKS/Otazo-Reyes

03-29-2021

DAVID BRYSON COX, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES, Respondent.

David Bryson Cox 665404 Hardee Correctional Institution Inmate Mail/Parcels 6901 State Road 62 Bowling Green, FL 33834 PRO SE


ORDER ADOPTING REPORT OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Magistrate Judge Alicia Otazo-Reyes's Report recommending denial of pro se litigant David Bryson Cox's Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis and recommending dismissal of Mr. Cox's complaint (DE 1) as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). (DE 19). Following issuance of the initial Report and Recommendation, Mr. Cox again filed a Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis. (DE 21). Magistrate Judge Otazo-Reyes issued a Supplemental Report and Recommendation concluding that nothing in the successive IFP motion warrants a different outcome. (DE 22).

Mr. Cox filed objections on March 8, 2021 (DE 25), and a "Motion to Correct Typos" on March 17, 2021 (DE 26). In his objections, Mr. Cox states that the clerk of court erroneously construed his complaint as being brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He says he is seeking arbitration of his claim that as a co-trustee with the U.S. Government he and his family members are entitled to $100,000,000 among other sums. (DE 25).

I have conducted a de novo review of the record, including Mr. Cox's complaint, the Magistrate Judge's two Reports, and Mr. Cox's objections and other filings, and I agree that the claims are without arguable merit either in law or in fact. Continued filing of this sort will result in sanctions, including restrictions on Mr. Cox's ability to submit pro se filings in the future. See Procup v. Strickland, 792 F. 2d 1069, 1071-73 (11th Cir. 1986).

Based upon the foregoing, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that:

(1) Plaintiff's Objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report(s) (DE 25) are OVERRULED.

(2) Magistrate Judge Otazo-Reyes's Reports (DE 19 and DE 22) are ADOPTED.

(3) Plaintiff's Motions for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (DE 6 and DE 21) are DENIED.

(4) Plaintiff's Complaint (DE 1) is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915.

(5) The Clerk of Court shall CLOSE THIS CASE.

(6) All pending motions are DENIED AS MOOT.

SIGNED in Chambers in West Palm Beach, Florida, this 29th day of March, 2020.

/s/_________

Donald M. Middlebrooks

United States District Judge Copies to: Magistrate Judge Otazo-Reyes;

David Bryson Cox

665404

Hardee Correctional Institution

Inmate Mail/Parcels

6901 State Road 62

Bowling Green, FL 33834

PRO SE


Summaries of

Cox v. United States

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Mar 29, 2021
CASE NO.: 20-62372-CIV-MIDDLEBROOKS/Otazo-Reyes (S.D. Fla. Mar. 29, 2021)

dismissing complaint with “incomprehensible and unsupported assertions”

Summary of this case from Freeman v. Ala. Dep't of Revenue
Case details for

Cox v. United States

Case Details

Full title:DAVID BRYSON COX, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Date published: Mar 29, 2021

Citations

CASE NO.: 20-62372-CIV-MIDDLEBROOKS/Otazo-Reyes (S.D. Fla. Mar. 29, 2021)

Citing Cases

Lowe v. Jenkins

See, e.g., Bilal v. Geo Care, LLC, 981 F.3d 903, 911 (11th Cir. 2020) (“[W]e liberally construe pro se…

Johnson v. Foley

The Complaints consist of random, unintelligible, nonsensical phrases not warranting federal review. See…