Stout v. Robnett, No. C.A. 2:99-2693-23.

CourtUnited States District Courts. 4th Circuit. United States District Court of South Carolina
Writing for the CourtDuffy
Citation107 F.Supp.2d 699
Docket NumberNo. C.A. 2:99-2693-23.
Decision Date03 March 2000
PartiesEverett Leon STOUT, Sovereign Inhabitant; Anthony Myers; and Citizens for Constitutional Justice; and All Other Sovereign Private Civilian Inhabitants, Plaintiffs, v. James ROBNETT, Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Agent, and Spouse; C. Kevin Cox, IRS Agent, and Spouse; Abel Trevino. IRS Agent, and Spouse; IRS District Director; and Six Unknown IRS John and Jane Does, and Spouses, Defendants.
107 F.Supp.2d 699
Everett Leon STOUT, Sovereign Inhabitant; Anthony Myers; and Citizens for Constitutional Justice; and All Other Sovereign Private Civilian Inhabitants, Plaintiffs,
v.
James ROBNETT, Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Agent, and Spouse; C. Kevin Cox, IRS Agent, and Spouse; Abel Trevino. IRS Agent, and Spouse; IRS District Director; and Six Unknown IRS John and Jane Does, and Spouses, Defendants.
No. C.A. 2:99-2693-23.
United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Charleston Division.
March 3, 2000.

Page 700

Everett Leon Stout, Orangeburg, SC, pro se, Anthony Myers, Goose Creek, SC, pro se.

Brian Kaufman, U.S. Department of Justice, Trial Attorney, Loretta C. Argrett, U.S. Department of Justice, Trial Attorney, Tax Division, Washington, DC, John H. Douglas, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Charleston, SC, for defendants.

ORDER

DUFFY, District Judge.


This matter brought by the pro se Plaintiffs is before the Court for review of the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and the local rules of the Court, that the Court should grant Defendants' motion to dismiss.

The Court is charged with conducting a de novo review of any portion of a Magistrate Judge's Report to which a specific objection is registered, and may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendations contained in that Report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Any written objection must specifically identify the portions of the Report and Recommendation to which objections are made and the basis for those objections. Id.

In this case, the Magistrate asserted that the Court should grant Defendants' motion to dismiss the instant action for several reasons. First, the Magistrate stated that an individual who is not a licensed attorney may not represent third parties, as such action constitutes the unauthorized practice of law. Rep. and Rec. at 702. Thus, the Magistrate recommended that insofar as Plaintiffs bring this action on behalf of other third parties, it must be dismissed. Id. Second, the Magistrate stated that while the Complaint seeks to sue IRS agents and their spouses in their personal capacities, the record fails to reflect that they have been properly served. Id. Moreover, after Defendants moved for dismissal on this ground, the Magistrate noted that Plaintiffs failed to come forward with appropriate proof of service. Id. Finally, the Magistrate found that Plaintiffs' Complaint was largely unintelligible,1 and

Page 701

failed to assert a cognizable cause of action, or any acts by the defendants or their spouses for which Plaintiffs could gain relief. Id. at 702. A review of the record indicates that the Magistrate Judge's Report accurately summarizes this case and the applicable law. Accordingly, the Court fully incorporates the Magistrate's Report and Recommendation into this Order.

Plaintiffs filed timely objections to the Magistrate's Report. However, Plaintiffs' Objections do not contain any meritorious arguments. Plaintiffs offer no proof that they properly served the Defendants in accordance with the South Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure or the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Furthermore, Plaintiffs do not point to any statements in their Complaint describing the actions taken by Defendants which allegedly gave rise to the violation of their constitutional rights. See Pavilonis v. King, 626 F.2d 1075, 1078 (1st Cir.1980) ("Complaints based on civil rights statutes must do more than state simple conclusions; they must at least outline the facts constituting the alleged violation.") (citation omitted); Koch v. Yunich, 533 F.2d 80, 85 (2d Cir.1976) ("Complaints relying on the civil rights statutes are plainly insufficient unless they contain some specific allegations of fact indicating a deprivation of civil rights, rather than state simple conclusions.") (citations omitted); Conway v. Slaughter, 440 F.2d 1278, 1279 (9th Cir.1971) (upholding dismissal where the allegations were "vague and conclusory in form and generally fail[ed] to meet the standard of factual specificity required in civil rights actions") (citations omitted); see also...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 practice notes
  • Roberts v. Ebay Inc., C/A No. 6:14-cv-4904-HMH-MGB
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. United States District Court of South Carolina
    • December 28, 2016
    ...a complaint or petition filed by a pro se litigant to allow the development of a potentially meritorious case." Stout v. Robnett, 107 F. Supp. 2d 699, 702 (D.S.C. 2000) (internal quotations and citations omitted). In the Amended Complaint, the Plaintiff claims $100,000 in damages against De......
  • Weatherall v. Fox, C/A No. 2:15-CV-2668-RMG-MGB
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. United States District Court of South Carolina
    • April 14, 2016
    ...Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 261 (1986). "This court is required to construe pro se complaints and petitions liberally." Stout v. Robnett, 107 F. Supp. 2d 699, 702 (D.S.C. 2000) (internal quotations and citations omitted). " [P]ro se complaints...are held to a less stringent standard than those draf......
  • United States v. Milford, C/A No. 2:15-CV-2009-RMG-MGB
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. United States District Court of South Carolina
    • July 8, 2016
    ...Anderson, 477 U.S. at 249-50. "This court is required to construe pro se complaints and petitions liberally." Stout v. Robnett, 107 F. Supp. 2d 699, 702 (D.S.C. 2000) (internal quotations and citations omitted). "[P]ro se complaints...are held to a less stringent standard than those drafted......
  • Silva v. Rogers, C/A No. 2:15-CV-2359-BHH-MGB
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. United States District Court of South Carolina
    • July 11, 2016
    ...counted." Anderson, 477 U.S. at 248. "This court is required to construe pro se complaints and petitions liberally." Stout v. Robnett, 107 F. Supp. 2d 699, 702 (D.S.C. 2000) (internal quotations and citations omitted). " [P]ro se complaints...are held to a less stringent standard than those......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
7 cases
  • Roberts v. Ebay Inc., C/A No. 6:14-cv-4904-HMH-MGB
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. United States District Court of South Carolina
    • December 28, 2016
    ...a complaint or petition filed by a pro se litigant to allow the development of a potentially meritorious case." Stout v. Robnett, 107 F. Supp. 2d 699, 702 (D.S.C. 2000) (internal quotations and citations omitted). In the Amended Complaint, the Plaintiff claims $100,000 in damages against De......
  • Weatherall v. Fox, C/A No. 2:15-CV-2668-RMG-MGB
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. United States District Court of South Carolina
    • April 14, 2016
    ...Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 261 (1986). "This court is required to construe pro se complaints and petitions liberally." Stout v. Robnett, 107 F. Supp. 2d 699, 702 (D.S.C. 2000) (internal quotations and citations omitted). " [P]ro se complaints...are held to a less stringent standard than those draf......
  • United States v. Milford, C/A No. 2:15-CV-2009-RMG-MGB
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. United States District Court of South Carolina
    • July 8, 2016
    ...Anderson, 477 U.S. at 249-50. "This court is required to construe pro se complaints and petitions liberally." Stout v. Robnett, 107 F. Supp. 2d 699, 702 (D.S.C. 2000) (internal quotations and citations omitted). "[P]ro se complaints...are held to a less stringent standard than those drafted......
  • Silva v. Rogers, C/A No. 2:15-CV-2359-BHH-MGB
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. United States District Court of South Carolina
    • July 11, 2016
    ...counted." Anderson, 477 U.S. at 248. "This court is required to construe pro se complaints and petitions liberally." Stout v. Robnett, 107 F. Supp. 2d 699, 702 (D.S.C. 2000) (internal quotations and citations omitted). " [P]ro se complaints...are held to a less stringent standard than those......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT