When both parties in a Federal Civil matter state they do not want a Magistrate Judge deciding the case, is that Magistrate still allowed to render an opinion? Additionally, is the Asst. U.S. Attorney that is handling the defense for the government allowed to change the complaint for a Fourteenth Amendment violation to a Fourth Amendment violation just because he can defend the Fourth but not the Fourteenth Amendment violation? Again, my complaint was a Fourteenth Amendment violation, which was confirmed by the Eleventh Circuit in Atlanta, but because the Magistrate Judge, who was not supposed to give an opinion, did so based on a false premise and invalid information, am I stuck with his opinion or is there a way to get a case reopened based on improper actions by the Asst. U.S. Atty and/or the Magistrate Judge?


If the judge has made an error of law on matters brought before them then that is grounds for an appeal.

So, if you raised the relevance of the fourteenth amendment and that issue was not addressed in the judgement then that is a clear error of law. If the judge addressed it and got it wrong then that is also an error of law.

However, if you never raised it or the judge rightly decided it was irrelevant then that is not an error of law.

What opposing counsel did in neither here nor there.

  • The words "relevance" and "irrelevant" are misplaced here and, on a site dealing with law, are prone to create unnecessary confusion. – A.fm. May 27 '19 at 6:41
  • @A.fm. Can you explain - the words are doing what I want them to do – Dale M Jun 2 '19 at 20:42
  • yeah, you're right. They are. I was being a bit overtechnical in hindsight. Was thinking it could be confused with relevance in the admission of evidence sense. My bad! – A.fm. Jun 4 '19 at 21:40

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.