From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Julius v. Kirk

United States District Court, D. Columbia
Dec 29, 2009
Civil Action No. 10 0009 (D.D.C. Dec. 29, 2009)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 10 0009.

December 29, 2009


MEMORANDUM OPINION


For purposes of this Memorandum Opinion and Order, the Court consolidates three separate complaints, each submitted with an application to proceed in forma pauperis.

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's complaint sets forth no facts at all, and utterly fails to comply with the minimal requirements of Rule 8(a). Neither the court nor the defendants can discern the nature or basis of plaintiff's claim, and the basis of the court's jurisdiction is unclear. As drafted, the complaint fails to comply with Rule 8(a), and, accordingly, the complaint will be dismissed. An Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion will be issued on this same date.


Summaries of

Julius v. Kirk

United States District Court, D. Columbia
Dec 29, 2009
Civil Action No. 10 0009 (D.D.C. Dec. 29, 2009)
Case details for

Julius v. Kirk

Case Details

Full title:TYRONE JULIUS, Plaintiff, v. JAMES T. KIRK, Defendant

Court:United States District Court, D. Columbia

Date published: Dec 29, 2009

Citations

Civil Action No. 10 0009 (D.D.C. Dec. 29, 2009)