Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Alexander v. Trump

United States District Court, W.D. Louisiana, Monroe Division

April 12, 2018

BRUCE ALEXANDER
v.
PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP, ET AL.

          TERRY A. DOUGHTY, JUDGE

          REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

          KAREN L. HAYES, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         Before the undersigned magistrate judge, on reference from the District Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), is a motion to dismiss under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) [doc. #21], filed by defendant, Henry Cotton in his official capacity as Mayor of the City of Bastrop ("Mayor Cotton ") as well as a motion to dismiss under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1) & (6), filed by defendants, President Donald Trump ("President Trump ") and F.B.I. Director Christopher Wray (“Director Wray”).[1] For reasons stated below, it is recommended that the motions be GRANTED, and that plaintiff's claims against defendant Cotton be DISMISSED with prejudice, and his claims against defendants Trump and Wray be DISMISSED without prejudice.

         Procedural History

         On August 28, 2017, Plaintiff filed the instant pro se complaint against President Trump, Director Wray, Louisiana Governor John B. Edwards, and Mayor Cotton in their respective official capacities. See Complaint, doc. #1, p. 2, ¶ 8. Plaintiff asserts violations of his Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment.

         On January 22, 2018, Mayor Cotton filed his motion to dismiss [doc. #21] arguing that Plaintiff has failed to allege essential elements to his § 1983 claim against Mayor Cotton. Mayor Cotton requests that the Court grant him attorney fees and costs pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988. Plaintiff filed his opposition [doc. #23], Mayor Cotton filed a reply [doc. #26], and Plaintiff filed a sur-reply [doc. #29]. On February 26, 2018, President Trump and Director Wray filed their motion to dismiss [doc. #30] arguing that the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction and that Plaintiff has failed to allege a claim against them. Plaintiff filed his opposition [doc. #40]. These matters are now ripe.

         The Complaint[2]

         A. Plaintiff's Factual Allegations.

         In November 2006, Plaintiff was summoned to testify as a witness in a murder trial in Farmerville, Union Parish, Louisiana. The criminal defendant's father hired the Sheriff of Morehouse Parish, the Chief of Police for the City of Bastrop, and the local division of the Federal Bureau of Investigation in Monroe, Louisiana (collectively, “the Conspirators”) to murder Plaintiff. The Conspirators then worked with various local businesses to poison Plaintiff. The Conspirators conducted constant surveillance of Plaintiff by monitoring and recording his telephone, placing tracking devices on his automobiles, and placing audio/video recording devices in his home. The Conspirators blocked Plaintiff's attempts to communicate with the outside world, including the Department of Justice, by intercepting telephone calls and mail. As a result of the poisoning, Plaintiff has suffered heart attacks, blood loss, and other ailments. Plaintiff informed Joe Mickel, assistant U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Louisiana, about the plot to kill him by poisoning. Mr. Mickel directed Plaintiff to obtain a blood test. While Plaintiff was on his way to obtain a blood test, the Conspirators abducted him and held him for 12 days. The Conspirators attempted to have Plaintiff committed to a state mental institution and to remove Plaintiff's “voice box.”

         B. Plaintiff's Claims.

         Plaintiff no specific claims against Director Wray. He claims that President Donald Trump “[f]ailed to properly maintain control of his appointed F.B.I. Director” and “[f]ailed to establish and assure the function of a bona fide and meaningful departmental system for dealing with complaint[s] of law enforcement misconduct.” Plaintiff asserts that Mayor Henry Cotton “failed to take action after this matter was brought to him on more than one occasion.”

         C. Plaintiff's Request for Relief.

         Plaintiff requests that the Court grant him declaratory and injunctive relief. Specifically, Plaintiff demands that the Court declare the acts set forth in his complaint to be unconstitutional and direct the defendants to restore his rights under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments. Plaintiff further requests that the ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.