Sampay v. Terrebonne Parish 32nd Judicial Court ( 2022 )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA PAUL ANTHONY SAMPAY CIVIL ACTION VERSUS NO. 22-1173 TERREBONNE PARISH 32ND SECTION D (2) JUDICIAL COURT, ET AL ORDER AND REASONS The Court, having considered de novo Plaintiff Paul Anthony Sampay’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint,1 the record, the applicable law, the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge,2 and the failure of the Plaintiff to file any objection to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation,3 hereby approves the Report and Recommendation and adopts it as its opinion in this matter. In doing so, the Court notes that it has construed Plaintiff Paul Anthony Sampay’s pro se pleading liberally.4 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims alleged in the Complaint5 against defendants, Terrebonne Parish 32nd Judicial Court, Judge Randall Bethancourt in his individual and official capacity, District Attorney Joseph L. Waitz, Jr. in his individual and official capacity, and Assistant District Attorney Jay Luke in his individual and official capaciy are DISMISSED WITH 1 R. Doc. 4. 2 R. Doc. 8. 3 Objections were due June 23, 2022. Because Plaintiff is proceeding pro se, the Court has allowed additional time for objections. None have been filed as of the date of this Order. 4 See Coleman v. United States, 912 F.3d 824, 828 (5th Cir. 2019). 5 R. Doc. 4. PREJUDICE pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) and § 1915A as frivolous, for the reasons stated in the Report and Recommendation. New Orleans, Louisiana, July 11, U\,, Vitti WENDY B. VITTER United States District Judge