IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS CENTRAL DIVISION

THERESA MARSHALL PLAINTIFF

v. No. 4:19-cv-913-DPM

RICHARD D. TAYLOR, United States Bankruptcy Judge; and MARK T. MCCARTY, Trustee* DEFENDANTS

ORDER 1. Marshall’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis, Ne 1, is granted. She can’t afford the filing fee. 2. The Court must screen her complaint.

(e)(2). Marshall says that Judge Taylor made various mistakes of law, disregarded court rules, and generally abused his power in her bankruptcy proceeding. She also challenges trustee Mark McCarty’s work in his final report and accounting. Judge Taylor is absolutely immune “from liability for damages for acts committed within [his] judicial jurisdiction.” Pierson v. Ray,

(1967). And because Marshall challenges McCarty’s action done in his official capacity as trustee, she must first obtain leave from the bankruptcy court before suing him in another forum. Alexander v. Hedback,

(8th Cir. 2013). Marshall has not pleaded, or provided

* The Court directs the Clerk to correct the named defendants.

any document indicating, that she has received this permission. The Court therefore will dismiss her complaint, Ne 2, without prejudice. So Ordered.

D.P. Marshall Jr. United States District Judge 7 fruvany 2020

~2-