Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-almd-3_08-cv-00264/USCOURTS-almd-3_08-cv-00264-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Gene Coggins
Plaintiff
Town of Jackson's Gap
Defendant

Document Text:

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

EASTERN DIVISION

GENE COGGINS,

Plaintiff,

V. CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:08cv264-TMH

TOWN OF JACKSON'S GAP,

Defendant.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Plaintiff Gene Coggins, proceeding pro Se, proceeds informapauperis in this action

(Doc. # 9).' Upon review of the complaint, the court concludes that dismissal of this action

prior to service of process is appropriate under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).2'

In this case, plaintiff sues the Town of Jackson's Gap. He complains that the

defendant town failed to protect him from theft and damage to his private property. He

further complains that the town unlawfully charged him with domestic violence and

1 This is one of nearly two dozen lawsuits filed by plaintiff in this district in just over one

year. Most of the cases have been dismissed prior to service of process; none have survived beyond

the motion to dismiss stage.

2 This order was originally entered on May 6, 2008 as a recommendation by Magistrate

Judge Susan Russ Walker and was vacated on the same day. The district judge has independently

reviewed the case and determined that dismissal is appropriate.

The statute provides, in pertinent part: "[T]he court shall dismiss the case at any time if the

court determines that. . . the action or appeal— (i) is frivolous or malicious, (ii) fails to state a claim

on which relief may be granted; or (iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune

from such relief." 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).

Case 3:08-cv-00264-TMH-SRW Document 22 Filed 05/15/08 Page 1 of 3
menacing, resulting in his false arrest and imprisonment. 4 Plaintiff seeks damages in an

amount exceeding twenty million dollars, a judgment dissolving the municipal corporation,

and other injunctive relief.5

The claims plaintiff seeks to assert in this action are barred by the doctrine of res

judicata. Resjudicata bars the filing of claims which were raised or could have been raised

in an earlier proceeding. Ragsdale v. Rubbermaid. Inc., 193 F.3d 1235, 1238 (11th Cir.

1999)(citation omitted). "A case is barred from re-litigation under the doctrine of res

judicata if: '(1) there is a final judgment on the merits; (2) the decision was rendered by a

court of competent jurisdiction; (3) the parties, or those in privity with them, are identical in

both suits; and (4) the same cause of action is involved in both cases." Konikov v. Orange

County. Florida, 2008 WL 1914440, *1 (11th Cir. May 1, 2008)(unpublished

opinion)(quoting Ragsdale, supra). "Resjudicata acts as a bar 'not only to the precise legal

Although plaintiff's allegations are vague, it is apparent from pleadings plaintiff has filed

in other actions in this court that these claims arise from plaintiff's dispute with his nephew, Mike

Coggins, over property plaintiff claims to own. $, e.g., Complaints in Civil Action No.

3:07cv402-MEF and Civil Action No. 3:O8cv101O-MHT.

Plaintiff includes allegations that the court in his criminal action, in order to enforce an

injunction it entered against plaintiff in its release order, "must provide written proof of any property

Mike Coggins owns in Tallapoosa County, or any where, legal written notices signed by present

owner giving him permission to be on said property, notarize by a local notary public, within the next

three working days from this notice.. . "(Complaint, p. 4). Plaintiff may not obtain injunctive relief

against the state court by means of the present civil action. Plaintiff's allegations about what the

state court must do to enforce its injunction, as well as his allegations that the state circuit court erred

by failing to grant his requested continuance of the criminal trial, are irrelevant to the claims he

brings against the sole defendant in this action, the Town of Jackson's Gap. Plaintiff made

substantially identical allegations in several other cases he filed in this court on the same day as the

present action. The defendants in the other cases included state court judges; these extraneous

allegations were likely included to support plaintiff's claims against those defendants.

2

Case 3:08-cv-00264-TMH-SRW Document 22 Filed 05/15/08 Page 2 of 3
theory presented in the previous litigation, but to all legal theories and claims arising out of

the same operative nucleus of fact." Pleming v. Universal-Rundle Corp., 142 F.3d 1354

(llthCir. 1998)(quotingManningv.City ofAuburn,953F.2d 1355, 1358(llthCir. 1992)).

The claims plaintiff asserts in this action were resolved previously by a final judgment

entered by a court of competent jurisdiction in a case brought by the plaintiff against the

same defendant. Coggins v. City of Jackson's Gap, Civil Action No. 3:07cv402-MEF

(See Doc. # 1, Complaint, and Doc. 45, Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, pp. 15-

20). In the earlier lawsuit, plaintiff's claims were dismissed with prejudice by judgment

entered on November 7, 2007 (Doc. # 48). Although plaintiff sought to appeal the judgment,

he failed to do so in a timely manner and, accordingly, his appeal was dismissed by the Court

of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. (Doc. # 54). Plaintiff may not now effectively "appeal"

the judgment dismissing his claims by filing a new action against the same defendant

asserting the same claims.

For the foregoing reasons, this action is due to be dismissed with prejudice. A

separate judgment will be entered.

DONE, this t4( day of May, 2008.

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3

Case 3:08-cv-00264-TMH-SRW Document 22 Filed 05/15/08 Page 3 of 3