Case 0:15-cv-60205-WJZ Document 5 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2015 Page 1 of 7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Case No. 15-CIV-60205-ZLOCH/HUNT

ANTHONY WILLIAMS, et. al.,

Plaintiffs,
v.
DUVAL COUNTY RECORDERS OFFICE, et al,
Defendants.
_______________________________________/
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
This matter is before this Court on a sua sponte review of the record. The
Honorable William J. Zloch referred to the undersigned all non-dispositive, pretrial
matters for disposition and all dispositive, pretrial matters for a Report and
Recommendation. See ECF No. 4; see 28 U.S.C. 636(b); see also S.D. Fla. L.R.,
Mag. R. 1. The undersigned has carefully reviewed the pleadings, the record in this
case, the applicable law and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. Based thereon,
it is respectfully recommended that Plaintiffs Complaint be DISMISSED WITH
PREJUDICE.

I.

Introduction

Plaintiffs, Anthony Williams a/k/a Private Attorney General Anthony Williams,

United States Office of the Private Attorney General, Florida Common Law Grand Jury,
Wayne Tull-Bey, Foreman; People of Florida (collectively, Plaintiffs), commenced this
action seeking injunctive and monetary relief, as well as a plethora of other forms of civil
1

Case 0:15-cv-60205-WJZ Document 5 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2015 Page 2 of 7

and criminal relief, on February 3, 2015. 1 See Compl., ECF No. 1. Plaintiffs assert that
Defendants, the Duval County Recorders Office, Ronnie Fussell, County Clerk, Mark E.,
Bailiff; Officer M.S. Richardson, Officer M. Lim, Officer J.C. Farrar, Officer Rivera
Marrer, Officer Jerry Thomas, Supervisor Chris (last name unknown), Supervisor Jody
Phillips, John Doe Clerks 1-100; Jane Doe Clerks 1-100, Doe Municipalities 1-100, Doe
Governmental Units 1-100, and Doe Instrumentalities 1-100 (collectively, Defendants),
in concert with the American Bar Association and the Florida Bar Association, have
denied the people of Florida and the United States basic constitutional and civil rights by
preventing the recording of lawful documents in the county recorders [sic] office. See
id. at 3.

The alleged fraud is a result of running a fraudulent unlawful recording

scheme. 2 Id. at 2.
The factual circumstances regarding Plaintiffs allegations arose on January 9
and January 23, 2015. See id. at 6, 24. On those dates, Candia Williams-El, Highly
Favored Shekinah El and Taquan Gullet-El were denied recording an Affidavit properly
notarized. Id.

These alleged events occurred at the Duval County courthouse. 3 A

The court also notes that Plaintiff Anthony Williams is a serial filer. See Case Nos.
14-60357-CIV-WJZ (case dismissed); 14-62939-CIV-JEM; 15-20111-CIV-MGC (case
dismissed); 15-60030-CIV-BB (case dismissed); 15-60039-CIV-BB; 15-60153-CIV-JIC
(case dismissed); 15-60115-CIV-ZLOCH.
2

Plaintiffs also cite numerous federal statutes including 42 U.S.C. 1983 but fail to
present any required elements to establish a claim under the cited statutory provisions.
3

The undersigned also notes that not only did all the alleged events occur in
Jacksonville but all the named Defendants are alleged to be residents of Jacksonville,
Florida. See 28 U.S.C. 1391 (b). As such, venue lies in the Northern District of
Florida. Venue is therefore improper in the Southern District of Florida, however,
transfer of this action is not required given that the Complaint fails to state a viable
cause of action. See Nalls v. Coleman Low Federal Institution, 440 F. Appx 704 (11th
Cir. 2011).
2

Case 0:15-cv-60205-WJZ Document 5 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2015 Page 3 of 7

supervisor by the name of Chris returned the fee tendered and refused recording the
affidavit without giving any reason for the refusal. Id. Plaintiff Williams, a professed
private attorney general, asked Chris to provide a reason why the affidavit(s) were
rejected. 4 See id. at 7, 32. Chris explained that the affidavit was rejected because it
did not meet the requirements of Florida Statutes Section 28.222.

Plaintiffs

acknowledge that the clerk stated he would record the affidavit administratively and it
would be placed in the miscellaneous section and charged an $8 fee.

Id. at 24.

Plaintiffs rejected this option. Id. The undersigned is able to glean from the documents
attached to the Complaint that Plaintiffs, at least on January 9, 2015, attempted to
record The Common Law Grand Jury Affidavit on the county record. Id.

Plaintiffs

also refer to this document as the Common Law Grand jury Notice. Id. at 34. The
undersigned notes that a document titled Affidavit of Florida Common Law Grand Jury
is attached to Plaintiffs Complaint and, although not clear from the Complaint, appears
to be the document that Plaintiffs tried to record. Id. at 48-49.
II.

Legal Standard

A pleading in a civil action 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). While a complaint
does not need detailed factual allegations, it must provide more than labels and
conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do.
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007); see Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S.
662, 678 (2009) (explaining that Rule 8(a)(2)s pleading standard demands more than
an unadorned, the-defendant-unlawfully-harmed-me accusation). Nor can a complaint
4

It is unclear whether the same affidavit or a different affidavit was filed on the dates
indicated above.
3

Case 0:15-cv-60205-WJZ Document 5 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2015 Page 4 of 7

rest on naked assertion[s] devoid of further factual enhancement. Iqbal, 556 U.S. at
678 (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 557 (alteration in original)).
A court, as a general rule, must accept the plaintiffs allegations as true and
evaluate all plausible inferences derived from those facts in favor of the plaintiff. See
Chaparro v. Carnival Corp., 693 F.3d 1333, 1337 (11th Cir. 2012); Miccosukee Tribe of
Indians of Fla. v. S. Everglades Restoration Alliance, 304 F.3d 1076, 1084 (11th Cir.
2002). While the Court is required to accept all of the allegations contained in the
complaint and exhibits attached to the pleadings as true, this tenet is inapplicable to
legal conclusions. Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678; Thaeter v. Palm Beach Cnty. Sheriffs Office,
449 F.3d 1342, 1352 (11th Cir. 2006) (When considering a motion to dismiss . . . the
court limits its consideration to the pleadings and all exhibits attached thereto.) (internal
quotation marks omitted).
III.

Discussion

Plaintiffs seek a declaratory judgment, a public apology, an injunction against

Defendants, a public reprimand to deter future misconduct, and damages in the amount
of 3 million dollars for each claim of a civil rights violation, abuses of power, emotional
distress, mental anguish, and public embarrassment alleged. Id. at 14-15. Even under
the relaxed pleading standard afforded to pro se litigants, Plaintiffs Complaint fails to
state a cause of action. See Abele v. Tolbert, 130 F. Appx 342, 343 (11th Cir. 2005);
Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b) (6).
First, the undersigned notes that Plaintiffs legal conclusion that the Clerk is
required to record ALL documents is legally incorrect.

Id. at 37.

Florida Statutes

Section 28.222 (1) plainly states that [t]he clerk of the circuit court shall be the recorder

Case 0:15-cv-60205-WJZ Document 5 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2015 Page 5 of 7

of all instruments that he or she may be required or authorized by law to record in the
county where he or she is clerk.

Section 28.222 (3) specifically enumerates the

documents that the clerk shall record. The clerks authority is entirely statutory, and his
official action, to be binding upon others, must be in conformity with the statutes.
Overholser v. Overstreet, 383 So. 2d 953 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). The clerk is merely a
ministerial officer of the court. Corbin v. Slaughter, 324 So. 2d 203 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975).
Thus, the statutory direction that only those instruments required or authorized by law
may be recorded constitutes a prohibition against recording other types of instruments.
Op. Atty Gen. Fla. 90-69 (1990). Accordingly, after carefully reviewing the statutory
language of Florida Statutes Section 28.222, the undersigned finds that Plaintiffs
Affidavit of Florida Common Law Grand Jury is not an enumerated document that the
clerk is authorized to record.
The remaining allegations of Plaintiffs Complaint cite a host of legal authorities
and principles that have no possible bearing on any claim attempted to be asserted
herein and certainly fail to assert any colorable claims for relief. Plaintiffs claims are
factually meritless and legally frivolous and fail to state a claim upon which relief can be
granted. The 49 page document is a rambling collection of quotes interspersed with
declarations regarding the failings of Americas lawyers, judges and court personnel.
For example, Plaintiffs declare that, [t]he members of the American Bar Association
and its affiliate Florida Bar Associations together have succeeded in corrupting our
government for their financial profit by convincing the clerks office that the only people
who know law are Bar attorneys; [a]ll these public servants who took a de facto oath
ultimately made themselves foreigners and foreign agents who are not US Citizens;

Case 0:15-cv-60205-WJZ Document 5 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2015 Page 6 of 7

and [t]his oath establishes them to be loyal to the government of England and operate
a conspiracy to control the American people with their statutes, codes, rules and
regulations and the Supreme Court Rules neither of which are law. Id. at 11. Finally,
the other remedies Plaintiffs seek, for example, removal from office and criminal
prosecution, are not within the scope of this Courts authority nor does this Court find
these requests meritorious.
RECOMMENDATION
Because Plaintiffs Complaint wholly fails to state a cause of action, the
undersigned

recommends

that

Plaintiffs

Complaint

be

DISMISSED

WITH

PREJUDICE. 5
The parties have fourteen (14) days after service of a copy of this Report and
Recommendation within which to file written objections, if any, with the Honorable
William J. Zloch, United States District Judge. See 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1) (providing
procedure for review of magistrate judge report and recommendation). Failure to timely
file objections shall bar the parties from a de novo determination by Judge Zloch of any
issue covered in the Report and shall bar the parties from challenging, on appeal, the
factual findings accepted or adopted by this Court, except upon grounds of plain error or
manifest injustice. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 14553 (1985) (citing United
States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 94950 (6th Cir. 1981)) (holding that party waives
appellate review of magistrate judges factual findings that were not objected to within
period prescribed by 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)); see also Dupree v. Warden, 715 F.3d
5

The Court may dismiss an action with prejudice if a more carefully drafted complaint
could not state a claim. Ziemba v. Cascade Intl, Inc., 256 F.3d 1194, 1213 (11th Cir.
2001) (internal quotation marks omitted). Plaintiffs claims here are legally baseless,
and no amount of re-drafting can cure that fundamental deficiency.
6

Case 0:15-cv-60205-WJZ Document 5 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/23/2015 Page 7 of 7

1295, 1300 (11th Cir. 2013) (holding that under current Eleventh Circuit rule: [T]he
failure to object limits the scope of our appellate review to plain error review of the
magistrate judges factual findings[; however,] failure to object to the magistrate judges
legal conclusions does not preclude the party from challenging those conclusions on
appeal.).
DONE AND SUBMITTED at Fort Lauderdale, Florida this 23th day of March
2015.

_____________________________________
PATRICK M. HUNT
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Copies furnished to:
Honorable William J. Zloch
All Counsel of Record
Anthony Williams, Pro Se
5722 Flamingo Road, #228
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33330
United States Office of the Private Attorney General, Pro Se
6230 3rd Street, Suite #5
Washington, DC 20011
Florida Common Law Grand Jury, Pro Se
P.O. Box 41052
Jacksonville, FL
Wayne Tull-Bey, Pro Se
P.O. Box 41052
Jacksonville, FL