From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Harris v. St. Louis Police

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION
May 3, 2017
No. 4:17-CV-1417 NCC (E.D. Mo. May. 3, 2017)

Opinion

No. 4:17-CV-1417 NCC

05-03-2017

KEN HARRIS, Plaintiff, v. ST. LOUIS POLICE, et al., Defendants.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Plaintiff seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis in this civil action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The motion is granted. Additionally, this action is dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e).

Standard of Review

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), the Court is required to dismiss a complaint filed in forma pauperis if it is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. To state a claim for relief, a complaint must plead more than "legal conclusions" and "[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action [that are] supported by mere conclusory statements." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009). A plaintiff must demonstrate a plausible claim for relief, which is more than a "mere possibility of misconduct." Id. at 679. "A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged." Id. at 678. Determining whether a complaint states a plausible claim for relief is a context-specific task that requires the reviewing court to draw on its judicial experience and common sense. Id. at 679.

Discussion

A John Doe police officer wrote plaintiff a summons for urinating and drinking in public. Plaintiff says the officer did not cite any statutes on the summons and did not sign it. Plaintiff told the officer he would file a lawsuit.

The complaint is frivolous because the allegations do not show that plaintiff's constitutional rights were violated. Therefore, this action is dismissed.

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis [ECF No. 2] is GRANTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED without prejudice.

An Order of Dismissal will be filed forthwith.

Dated this 3rd day of May, 2017.

/s/_________

AUDREY G. FLEISSIG

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Harris v. St. Louis Police

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION
May 3, 2017
No. 4:17-CV-1417 NCC (E.D. Mo. May. 3, 2017)
Case details for

Harris v. St. Louis Police

Case Details

Full title:KEN HARRIS, Plaintiff, v. ST. LOUIS POLICE, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION

Date published: May 3, 2017

Citations

No. 4:17-CV-1417 NCC (E.D. Mo. May. 3, 2017)