IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA SOUTHEASTERN DIVISION
September 17, 2010
ZORICA MUJKANOVIC, PLAINTIFF,
NORTH DAKOTA WORKFORCE SAFETY INSURANCE, DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Ralph R. Erickson, Chief District Judge United States District Court
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Plaintiff Mujkanovic filed a complaint in which she wishes to appeal the decision of North Dakota Workforce Safety Insurance ("WSI) denying her claim for benefits. The Court has received a Report and Recommendation from the Honorable Karen K. Klein, United States Magistrate Judge, recommending that:
1) Mujkanovic's complaint be dismissed with prejudice;
2) The Court certify that an appeal from the dismissal of this action may not be taken in forma pauperis because such an appeal is frivolous and cannot be taken in good faith; and
3) A certificate of appealability not be issued with respect to any of the issues raised by Mujkanovic in this action.
No party has objected to the Report and Recommendation.
The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation and finds that the Eleventh Amendment provides states and state agencies with immunity from Mujkanovic's claims. Thus, the Report and Recommendation is adopted in its entirety.
Based upon the entire record before the Court, dismissal of the complaint is not debatable, reasonably subject to a different outcome on appeal, or otherwise deserving of further proceedings.
Therefore, a certificate of appealability will not be issued by this court. See Tiedeman v. Benson, 122 F.3d 518, 522 (8th Cir. 1997) (holding that a district court possesses the authority to issue certificates of appealability under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)). If the plaintiff desires further review of her petition, she may request the issuance of a certificate of appealability by a circuit judge of the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals in accordance with Tiedeman v. Benson, 122 F.3d 518, 25-52 (8th Cir. 1997).
Additionally, the Court finds that any appeal would be frivolous, could not be taken in good faith, and may not be taken in forma pauperis. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) ("An appeal may not be taken in forma pauperis if the trial court certifies in writing that it is not taken in good faith."); see also Coppedge v. United States, 360 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962).
For the foregoing reasons, Mujkanovic's application requesting habeas relief is DENIED.
LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.
© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.