From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Garner v. Supreme Court of U.S.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Apr 10, 2013
Civil Action No. 1:13-cv-00466-UNA (D.D.C. Apr. 10, 2013)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 1:13-cv-00466-UNA

04-10-2013

DAVID LEE GARNER, Plaintiff, v. THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, et al., Defendants.


MEMORANDUM OPINION

This matter comes before the court on review of plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis and pro se civil complaint. The Court will grant the application, and dismiss the complaint.

The Court has reviewed plaintiff's complaint, keeping in mind that complaints filed by pro se litigants are held to less stringent standards than those applied to formal pleadings drafted by lawyers. See Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972). Even pro se litigants, however, must comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Jarrell v. Tisch, 656 F. Supp. 237, 239 (D.D.C. 1987). Rule 8(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires that a complaint contain a short and plain statement of the grounds upon which the Court's jurisdiction depends, a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief, and a demand for judgment for the relief the pleader seeks. Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). The purpose of the minimum standard of Rule 8 is to give fair notice to the defendants of the claim being asserted, sufficient to prepare a responsive answer, to prepare an adequate defense and to determine whether the doctrine of res judicata applies. Brown v. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977).

Plaintiff, who currently is incarcerated at the United States Penitentiary in Lewisburg, Pennsylvania, brings this action against dozens of defendants on claims arising from his current incarceration. The Court, however, identifies neither a short and plain statement of a particular claim against a particular defendant, nor a clear statement of plaintiff's entitlement to relief. As drafted, the complaint fails to comply with Rule 8(a), and it will be dismissed. An Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is issued separately.

______________________

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Garner v. Supreme Court of U.S.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Apr 10, 2013
Civil Action No. 1:13-cv-00466-UNA (D.D.C. Apr. 10, 2013)
Case details for

Garner v. Supreme Court of U.S.

Case Details

Full title:DAVID LEE GARNER, Plaintiff, v. THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, et…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Date published: Apr 10, 2013

Citations

Civil Action No. 1:13-cv-00466-UNA (D.D.C. Apr. 10, 2013)

Citing Cases

Garner v. Colen

Garner previously has had more than three cases or appeals dismissed as frivolous. See Garner v. Supreme…