From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Chatman v. Santa Fe R.R.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Sep 27, 2018
Case No. 18-cv-05510-JD (N.D. Cal. Sep. 27, 2018)

Opinion

Case No. 18-cv-05510-JD

09-27-2018

ERIC C. CHATMAN, Plaintiff, v. SANTA FE RAILROAD, Defendant.


ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Plaintiff, a state prisoner, has filed a pro se civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He has been granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis.

DISCUSSION

STANDARD OF REVIEW

Federal courts must engage in a preliminary screening of cases in which prisoners seek redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). In its review, the Court must identify any cognizable claims, and dismiss any claims which are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. Id. at 1915A(b)(1),(2). Pro se pleadings must be liberally construed. Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep't, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1990).

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2) requires only "a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief." Although a complaint "does not need detailed factual allegations, . . . a plaintiff's obligation to provide the 'grounds' of his 'entitle[ment] to relief' requires more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do. . . . Factual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level." Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007) (citations omitted). A complaint must proffer "enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Id. at 570. The United States Supreme Court has explained the "plausible on its face" standard of Twombly: "While legal conclusions can provide the framework of a complaint, they must be supported by factual allegations. When there are well-pleaded factual allegations, a court should assume their veracity and then determine whether they plausibly give rise to an entitlement to relief." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 679 (2009).

To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege that: (1) a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States was violated, and (2) the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under the color of state law. West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988).

LEGAL CLAIMS

Plaintiff states that he was homeless and to stay out of trouble he jumped on a train where he was assaulted and injured. Plaintiff also states he was trying to help the police and judges in Nevada and California and trying to stay out of trouble. Plaintiff names as defendant the railroad and for relief he seeks money damages, several trains and a train station, multiple casinos in Las Vegas and properties in California. Plaintiff's allegations are frivolous and fail to state a claim. Because no amount of amendment would cure the deficiencies of the complaint, this action is dismissed without leave to amend.

CONCLUSION

1. The complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice as frivolous and for failure to state a claim.

2. The Clerk shall close this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: September 27, 2018

/s/_________

JAMES DONATO

United States District Judge

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California.

That on September 27, 2018, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing said copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by depositing said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery receptacle located in the Clerk's office. Eric C. Chatman ID: BD5474
SVSP
P.O. Box 1050
Soledad, CA 93960 Dated: September 27, 2018

Susan Y. Soong

Clerk, United States District Court

By:/s/_________

LISA R. CLARK, Deputy Clerk to the

Honorable JAMES DONATO


Summaries of

Chatman v. Santa Fe R.R.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Sep 27, 2018
Case No. 18-cv-05510-JD (N.D. Cal. Sep. 27, 2018)
Case details for

Chatman v. Santa Fe R.R.

Case Details

Full title:ERIC C. CHATMAN, Plaintiff, v. SANTA FE RAILROAD, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Sep 27, 2018

Citations

Case No. 18-cv-05510-JD (N.D. Cal. Sep. 27, 2018)