Opinion
NO. 1:05-cv-144(WLS).
November 2, 2005
ORDER
Plaintiff ANNETTE DEBERRY has filed a pro se civil rights complaint. Plaintiff also seeks leave to proceed in this case without prepayment of the filing fee or security therefor pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). As it appears that plaintiff is unable to pay the cost of commencing this action, her application to proceed in forma pauperis is hereby GRANTED.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), the Court is required to review an in forma pauperis complaint and dismiss it if the complaint: (1) is frivolous or malicious; (2) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or (3) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief. An action is frivolous when the plaintiff's legal theory or factual contentions lack an arguable basis either in law or fact. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989). A claim is factually frivolous when the facts alleged are "fanciful," "fantastic," and "delusional." Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 32-33 (1992).
Plaintiff's complaint contains numerous vague and unclear allegations. Among other things, plaintiff contends that the people of Adel, Georgia were responsible for the deaths of Plaintiff's parents and siblings; that "the system" has interfered with her efforts to remain free and single; that charges were brought against plaintiff in an attempt to force her to become gay; that various banks and financial groups have plotted to destroy plaintiff's credibility; that Vice President Cheney's daughter and First Lady Bush are somehow supporting lesbianism in Georgia; that plaintiff's mail and financial accounts are being monitored; and that Albany State University sold plaintiff's two college degrees for monetary gain. Plaintiff names as her sole defendant the United States Congress, which she sues "for all of [plaintiff's] pain and suffering, for allowing the states to make up their own laws, to govern a single person's lifestyle, using marriage or homosexuality, as a criteria for equal treatment in a democracy."
The Court concludes that plaintiff's complaint is "fanciful," "fantastic," and "delusional," and therefore frivolous. Plaintiff's complaint advances no legal theory that the court is able to discern. Moreover, many of plaintiff's allegations were raised and rejected in DeBerry v. City of Adel, 7:02-cv-125(CAR) (M.D. Ga. May 7, 2003) (dismissed as frivolous). The Court is therefore satisfied that plaintiff's complaint is frivolous and DISMISSES this action WITH PREJUDICE.
SO ORDERED.