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.

Jones v. Williamson

United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Jacksonville Division

April 12, 2019

Stephanie Diane Jones et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
Arther Lee Williamson, Defendant.

          REPORT & RECOMMENDATION

          PATRICIA D. BARKSDALE, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         Arther Lee Williamson has filed a “Notice of Removal in Pursuant to the Jurisdiction and Removal Act of 1875, ” Doc. 1, and a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, Doc. 2. Because he provides no valid basis for removal, the undersigned recommends remand to the state court and denial of the motion.

         Background

          For the caption of the notice, Mr. Williamson names himself as the “Respondent, ” names Stephanie D. Jones and the Florida Department of Revenue as the “Defendant, ” and provides information about the “Lower Tribunal Case”: No. 2011-DR-10768-FM, Division FM-G, Circuit Court, Fourth Judicial Circuit.

         In the body of the notice, Mr. Williamson states:

I Arther Lee Williamson representing himself in pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1654[1] do hereby says: This court does have federal jurisdiction base upon constitutional tort.

         GROUND FOR REMOVAL

         In pursuant to U.S.C. sec. 1332(a) and 28 U.S.C. sec.1446; The district court shall have original jurisdiction of all civil action where the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of the amount shown in attachment.

1. I am a disable veteran and only receive $1068.36 dollars a month; See attachment.
2. An order for a writ of bodily attachment issue by Judge Lance M. Day;[2] See attachment.
3. The purge is for the amount of $1, 500. Which I do not have the ability to pay.

         Doc. 1 at 1 (errors in original).

         Mr. Williamson quotes the Fourteenth Amendment and argues, “The lower court did violate my procedure due process; how they violated the 14the amendment? By issuing an order for writ of bodily attachment knowing that I am a disable veteran and how much I receive each month.” Doc. 1 at 2 (errors in original). He continues, “The 4th judicial circuit has constant displayed bias and prejudice by violating [his] 14th amendment right, which is why [he] is requesting for a removal to Federal Court to insure he receives justices in pursuant to constitutional rights.” Doc. 1 at 2 (errors in original). He asks this Court to void the writ and permanently enjoin the state court from issuing any more writs. Doc. 1 at 2.

         Mr. Williamson attaches the order authorizing an issuance of a writ of bodily attachment. Doc. 1-1. In the order, Judge Day finds Mr. Williamson failed to appear after notice, failed to pay child support obligations, and has the ability to pay a $1, 500 purge amount. Doc. 1-1 at 1. Judge Day holds that Mr. Williamson is in arrears for $13, 855.74 through October 22, 2018, authorizes a writ of bodily attachment for failure to pay child support, explains Mr. Williamson may secure his release from the writ by paying the $1, 500 purge amount, and reserves jurisdiction to determine the “pending contempt issue.”[3] Doc. 1-1 at 1-2.

         Mr. Williamson also attaches a letter from the Florida Department of Veterans' Affairs confirming that he receives service-connected monthly compensation of $1, 068.36. Doc. 1-1 at 3.

         Besides the notice and motion to proceed in forma pauperis, Mr. Williamson filed a motion for sanctions against Judge Day. Doc. 3. This Court denied the motion for failure to include a memorandum of law required by Local Rule 3.01(a). Doc. 4.

         Mr. Williamson also filed a motion for a hearing “to determine facts and evidence.” Doc. 6. In the motion, he states, “This court does have federal jurisdiction base upon constitutional tort. In pursuant to U.S.C. sec. 1332 (a) and 28 U.S.C. sec.1446; the district court shall have original jurisdiction. A court may not use arrest warrants or any form of seizure of property, suspension of license etc. As a means of coercion payment of court debt where individual has not been afforded constitutional adequate ...


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.