From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Duncan v. Schafer

United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, Eastern Division
May 25, 2011
No. 4:11CV880 CDP (E.D. Mo. May. 25, 2011)

Opinion

No. 4:11CV880 CDP.

May 25, 2011


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER


This matter is before the Court upon the motion of plaintiff for leave to commence this action without prepayment of the filing fee pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Upon consideration of the financial information provided with the motion, the Court finds that plaintiff is financially unable to pay any portion of the filing fee. As a result, plaintiff will be granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Additionally, the Court has reviewed the complaint and will dismiss it pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).

28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), the Court must dismiss a complaint filed in forma pauperis if the action is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. An action is frivolous if it "lacks an arguable basis in either law or fact." Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 328 (1989). An action is malicious if it is undertaken for the purpose of harassing the named defendants and not for the purpose of vindicating a cognizable right. Spencer v. Rhodes, 656 F. Supp. 458, 461-63 (E.D.N.C. 1987), aff'd 826 F.2d 1059 (4th Cir. 1987).

To determine whether an action fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, the Court must engage in a two-step inquiry. First, the Court must identify the allegations in the complaint that are not entitled to the assumption of truth.Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 1950-51 (2009). These include "legal conclusions" and "[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action [that are] supported by mere conclusory statements." Id. at 1949. Second, the Court must determine whether the complaint states a plausible claim for relief. Id. at 1950-51. This is a "context-specific task that requires the reviewing court to draw on its judicial experience and common sense." Id. at 1950. The plaintiff is required to plead facts that show more than the "mere possibility of misconduct." Id. The Court must review the factual allegations in the complaint "to determine if they plausibly suggest an entitlement to relief."Id. at 1951. When faced with alternative explanations for the alleged misconduct, the Court may exercise its judgment in determining whether plaintiff's conclusion is the most plausible or whether it is more likely that no misconduct occurred. Id. at 1950, 51-52.

The Complaint

Plaintiff is a civil detainee at the Southeast Missouri Mental Health Center. He brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, against Keith Schafer, the Education Director at the mental health center.

In his complaint for injunctive relief, plaintiff complains that the mental health center lacks sufficient legal materials. Specifically, plaintiff complains that he has limited access to computer time at the facility and no access to a full legal library. Plaintiff also asserts that he cannot call a lawyer unless he has a letter of representation, and he is not able to call 1-800 numbers unless he has prior approval. Lastly, plaintiff complains that there is no training being given as to how to attain conditional or unconditional release from the Department of Mental Health.

Discussion

To the extent that plaintiff is attempting to assert an access-to-the-courts claim, the complaint is legally frivolous. "To state a claim that a law library or legal assistance program violates this right, inmates must assert that they suffered an actual injury to pending or contemplated legal claims." Myers v. Hundley, 101 F.3d 542, 544 (8th Cir. 1996). Plaintiff has failed to do so, thus, his complaint is subject to summary dismissal.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis [Doc. #2] is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall not issue process or cause process to issue upon the complaint because the complaint is legally frivolous or fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, or both.

An appropriate Order of Dismissal shall accompany this Memorandum and Order.


Summaries of

Duncan v. Schafer

United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, Eastern Division
May 25, 2011
No. 4:11CV880 CDP (E.D. Mo. May. 25, 2011)
Case details for

Duncan v. Schafer

Case Details

Full title:DAVID LENLEY DUNCAN, Plaintiff, v. KEITH SCHAFER, Defendant

Court:United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, Eastern Division

Date published: May 25, 2011

Citations

No. 4:11CV880 CDP (E.D. Mo. May. 25, 2011)

Citing Cases

Wright v. Anderson

To state a claim for denial of meaningful access to the courts a plaintiff must assert he "suffered an actual…