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.

Taveras v. Schreiber

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

December 6, 2019

ELIEZER TAVERAS, Plaintiff,
v.
MARGARET H. SCHREIBER, Defendant.

          ORDER

          CARLOS E. MENDOZA UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (“Motion, ” Doc. 25) and Plaintiff's Response in Opposition (Doc. 26). For the reasons stated herein, the Motion will be granted.

         I. Background

         This case arises from an ongoing state court foreclosure action in the Circuit Court of the Ninth Judicial Circuit in and for Osceola County, Florida. (Compl., Doc. 1, at 2-3). Plaintiff, a United States citizen domiciled in Spain, is a defendant in the underlying state court proceeding, and Defendant is the presiding state court judge. (Id.). Plaintiff alleges generally that Defendant violated Plaintiff's constitutional rights in the state court action, causing damages to Plaintiff in the form of emotional distress, litigation costs, and loss of income. (See generally id.). Specifically, Plaintiff takes issue with the following actions taken by Defendant in the state court proceeding:

• Denying Plaintiff's Motion to Strike Sham Pleadings without a hearing. (Id. at 3-4).
• Setting six monthly case management conferences when Plaintiff is domiciled in Spain. (Id. at 4).
• Striking as premature Plaintiff's Second Motion to Strike Sham Pleadings without a hearing. (Id. at 5).
• Advising Plaintiff to hire counsel to represent him. (Id. at 6).

         Plaintiff requests declaratory and injunctive relief as well as monetary damages. (Id. at 13-14). Defendant moves to dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). (Doc. 25 at 1).

         II. Legal Standard

         “A pleading that states a claim for relief must contain . . . a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2). Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), a party may move to dismiss a complaint for “failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.” In determining whether to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), a court accepts the factual allegations in the complaint as true and construes them in a light most favorable to the non-moving party. See United Techs. Corp. v. Mazer, 556 F.3d 1260, 1269 (11th Cir. 2009). Nonetheless, “the tenet that a court must accept as true all of the allegations contained in a complaint is inapplicable to legal conclusions, ” and “[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements, do not suffice.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009). Furthermore, “[t]o survive a motion to dismiss, a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.'” Id. (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). “A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.” Id. Generally, in deciding a motion to dismiss, “[t]he scope of the review must be limited to the four corners of the complaint.” St. George v. Pinellas Cty., 285 F.3d 1334, 1337 (11th Cir. 2002).

         III. Analysis

         A. The Claims

         Plaintiff's Complaint asserts five separate counts, each of which appear to confuse what claims may be brought under particular statutes. However, the Court is obligated to liberally construe the claims in the Complaint because pro se litigants are held “to less stringent standards than ...


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.