From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Dupree v. Mfume

United States District Court, N.D. Texas
Oct 20, 2003
NO. 3-03-CV-2240 (N.D. Tex. Oct. 20, 2003)

Opinion

NO. 3-03-CV-2240

October 20, 2003


FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


This case has been referred to the United States magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and a standing order of reference from the district court. The findings and recommendation of the magistrate judge are as follow:

I.

This is a civil rights action brought by Plaintiff Byron Bernard Dupree, an inmate in the TDC J-ID, against the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People ("NAACP") and its president, Kwesi Mfume. On September 30, 2003, plaintiff tendered a pro se complaint to the district clerk and filed an application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Because the information provided by plaintiff in his pauper's affidavit indicates that he lacks the funds necessary to prosecute this case, the court granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis and allowed the complaint to be filed. Upon further review, the court determines that this action is frivolous and should be summarily dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).

II

Plaintiff alleges that defendants have violated his civil rights by refusing to provide him with legal representation to challenge his conviction and resulting incarceration on drug charges. As relief, plaintiff seeks $14,000 in compensatory damages, $60,000 in punitive damages, and an injunction requiring the NAACP to provide him with a lawyer.

A.

A district court may dismiss a complaint filed in forma pauperis if it concludes that the action is frivolous or malicious. 28U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). An action is frivolous if it lacks an arguable basis in either law or fact. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325, 109S.Q. 1827, 1831, 104L.Ed.2d338 (1989); Henson-El v. Rogers, 923 F.2d 51, 53 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 111 S.Ct. 2863 (1991). A complaint is without an arguable basis in law if it is grounded upon an untenable or discredited legal theory. Neitzke, 109 S.Ct. at 1831. A claim maybe deemed to lack an arguable basis in fact only if it is based upon factual allegations that are clearly fanciful or delusional in nature. Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 33, 112 S.Ct. 1728, 1733, 118 L.Ed.2d 340 (1992).

B.

Plaintiffs claims are without an arguable basis in law. In order to maintain a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, plaintiff must show that he has been deprived of a federally protected right by a person acting "under color of state law." 42 U.S.C. § 1983; see also West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48, 108 S.Ct. 2250, 2255, 101 L.Ed.2d 40 (1988). Neither the NAACP, a private organization, nor Kwesi Mfume, a private citizen, are state actors. Consequently, plaintiff is not entitled to relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

RECOMMENDATION

Plaintiffs complaint should be summarily dismissed as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).


Summaries of

Dupree v. Mfume

United States District Court, N.D. Texas
Oct 20, 2003
NO. 3-03-CV-2240 (N.D. Tex. Oct. 20, 2003)
Case details for

Dupree v. Mfume

Case Details

Full title:BYRON BERNARD DUPREE Plaintiff, v. KWESI MFUME, ET AL. Defendants

Court:United States District Court, N.D. Texas

Date published: Oct 20, 2003

Citations

NO. 3-03-CV-2240 (N.D. Tex. Oct. 20, 2003)

Citing Cases

Johnson v. Nat'l Ass'n for the Advancement of Colored People

In order to maintain a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, "a plaintiff must show that he has been…