Howard Page Jr. v. Family Court Case 25-1546 - Dismissal Order

IN THE UNITED STAT ES DISTRICT COUR T FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE _______________________________________) HOWARD PAGE, JR.,)) Plaintiff,)) v.) C.A. No. 25-1546- JLH) THE FAMILY COUR T OF) THE STATE OF DELAWARE, et al.,)) Defend ant s.) _______________________________________) MEMORANDUM OR DER At Wilmington, this 3rd day of March 2026: WHEREAS, Plaintiff Howard Page, Jr., a pretrial detaine e at James T. Vaughn Correctional Center (JTVCC), in Smyrna, Delaware, filed a pro se Complaint unde r 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (D.I. 2) and was granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis (D.I. 5); WHEREAS, the Court must dismiss the case sua sponte if it is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim upon whi ch relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune fr om such re lief, 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B), 1915A(b); WHEREAS, when asses sing whether the C omplai nt states a claim, th e Court accept s the facts alleged in the Com plaint as true and d raws a ll reasonab le inf erences i n Pl aintiff’ s f avor, and asks only whether the complaint, li berally construed, contains facts sufficient to state a plausible claim., see Shorter v. United States, 12 F.4th 366, 374 (3d Cir. 2021); WHEREAS, Plaintiff’s Complaint is difficult to decipher but he appears to contend that Defend ant Detective Lindsay Cole man testif ied fa lsely to a sta te gran d jury, resulting in Plaintiff ’s

2 indictment and subsequent arrest, and t hat Plaintif f ’s constitutional rights are being viol ated in connection with his prosecution in Delaware Family Court; WHEREAS, the Complaint requests (among other things) Pla intiff’s rel ease from st ate pretrial detention and monetary relief; WHEREAS, Plain tiff names as Defendan ts th e “ The Family Court of the State of Delawar e,” t he “Clerk of the Courts [of] the Family Court of the State of Delaware,” and Judge Paula T. Ryan, but tho se Defendan ts are immune from suit pursuant to judicial immun ity and/or Eleventh Amendmen t immunity, N emeth v. Off. of Cler k of Superi or Ct. of New Jersey, 837 F. App ’x 924, 928 (3d Cir. 2020); WHEREAS, Plaintiff f ails to alleg e fac ts suf ficient to state a plausible cl aim agains t Defend ant “Chief E xecut ive of th e Dept. of Family Services”; WHEREAS, the Complaint contains a bare as sert ion that Defendant Coleman provided false te stimony to a gran d jury, but the Complaint does not explain what she lied about, nor does it allege a ny other facts t hat would suggest a plaus ible claim against Defend ant Colem an; and WHEREAS, to the extent Plaintiff se eks release b ased on alleged st ate acti ons resulting in his current pretrial c onfinement (as opposed to the conditions of his c onfinement), Plaintiff cannot seek reli ef from this C ourt, see Younger v. Harris. 401 U.S. 37, 54 (1971) (explaining that fede ral courts cannot interfere with ongoing state judicial proceedings that implicate imp ortant sta te interests and afford an adequate opportunity to raise federal claims);

3 NOW, THEREFORE, the Complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B), 1915A(b) becaus e it fail s to state a cl aim and be cause i t seeks r elief fr om defendants who are immune. Plaintiff is granted l eave to file an Amended Complaint on or before April 2, 2026. T he H onor a bl e J e nni f e r L. H a l l U n ite d S ta te s D is t r i c t J udge