Opinion
4:24-cv-183-DPM
04-18-2024
ALI ALI BEY PLAINTIFF v. RICHARD SZABAD; BRYANT POLICE DEPARTMENT; TRE DAVIS, Patrol Person DEFENDANTS
ORDER
D.P. Marshall Jr., United States District Judge.
1. Bey's application to proceed in forma pauperis, Doc. 1, is granted. He reports living on minimal income.
2. The Court must screen Bey's complaint. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). The Court's rules require a short and plain statement of facts that show a plausible violation of some particular law. Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a); 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). Bey has sued the defendants in their official and individual capacities under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging that his "civil rights of freedom of movement" were violated. Doc. 2 at 3. Bey offers no further allegation in his complaint.
The Court can identify some details from the attached police narratives. In March 2023, Officer Tre Davis was dispatched to Szabad Brothers business to investigate a possible theft. Officer Davis found a man recovering scrap metal from the business's dumpster. The man identified himself as "Henry Alibey" and reported that he believed the contents of the dumpster were abandoned and free to be taken. Despite Alibey returning the property to the dumpster, Officer Davis issued him two citations for theft of scrap metal and criminal trespass. Alibey was not detained.
Two weeks later, Alibey asked a different officer to assist him in filing charges against Szabad. Alibey alleged that, during the earlier incident, he was falsely imprisoned when Richard Szabad blocked his car in the Szabad Brothers' parking lot until Officer Davis could arrive. The officer agreed to supplement Officer's Davis's narrative report with Bey's assertions of false imprisonment.
The Court needs more information. While the officers' narratives provide context, the Court is left to guess as to the specific cause of action. Bey fails to state what claim he is raising against Szabad, Officer Davis, and the Bryant Police Department. Bey must also specifically state if he is the "Henry Alibey" identified in the police reports.
3. Bey must file an amended complaint with more details by 17 May 2024. If he does not, the Court will dismiss his case without prejudice. LOCAL RULE 5.5(c)(2).
So Ordered.