From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McDaniel v. District of Columbia Metropolitan Police D

United States District Court, D. Columbia
Dec 18, 2008
Civil Action No. 08 2239 (D.D.C. Dec. 18, 2008)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 08 2239.

December 18, 2008


MEMORANDUM OPINION


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

The complaint states that the defendant has allowed "individuals to stalk, threaten my life and abuse my civil rights protected under the 4th, 5th, 7th, 9th and 14th Amendments, and causing me bodily injury and financial strain and . . . [defendant has] illegally surveiled and harassed me using irrebuttable presumptions classified under § 14.0. . . . " (Compl. at 1.) Plaintiff makes only such conclusory allegations and provides no specific facts.

A complaint that alleges only vague or conclusory allegations without specific facts regarding the alleged wrongdoing does not allow a defendant to frame an intelligent defense and is subject to dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) as "lacking an arguable basis in fact" and therefore failing to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989). Plaintiff's complaint does not allege facts sufficient to provide a basis in fact, and will therefore be dismissed.

An appropriate order accompanies this memorandum opinion.


Summaries of

McDaniel v. District of Columbia Metropolitan Police D

United States District Court, D. Columbia
Dec 18, 2008
Civil Action No. 08 2239 (D.D.C. Dec. 18, 2008)
Case details for

McDaniel v. District of Columbia Metropolitan Police D

Case Details

Full title:Ronnie Lee McDaniel, Plaintiff, v. District of Columbia Metropolitan…

Court:United States District Court, D. Columbia

Date published: Dec 18, 2008

Citations

Civil Action No. 08 2239 (D.D.C. Dec. 18, 2008)