Opinion

Weekes v. Whole Foods Market

Court
District Court, District of Columbia
Filed
Aug 1, 2013
Status
Published
On the bench
Judge Thomas F. Hogan
Nature of suit
Civil
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 31.3%

The opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

GUY WEEKS, )

) /» , 3

Piaintiff, ) \9 il g

)

v. ) Civil Action No.

) F I L E D

wHoLE Fooos MARKET, )

or d t i AHGM! 2013

e en an . cf _ _

@t,::; :;Ft.,@'z:';:,',»§§i'a';z:‘:::ia

MEMoRANDuM oPlNloN

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 plaintiffs 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 Haz`nes v. Kerrzer, 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. 23 7, 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. Calzfarzo, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. l977). As

drafted, plaintiff s pleading fails to accomplish even these minimal goals.

Plaintiff alleges that he "was barred from store open to the public for no reason other than

discrimination violating [his] constitutional[,] civil and other rights." Compl. at l. For these and

other alleged harms, plaintiff demands monetary damages. Id. at 2. Because the complaint

neither sets forth sufficient factual allegations showing that he is entitled to relief nor includes a

short and plain statement of the grounds upon which the Court’s jurisdiction depends, the

pleading fails to comply with Rule 8(a) and, accordingly, it will be dismissed.

An Order is issued separately.

_oZZ.////黢~

/% United States District Juge j

DATE: 7 fl

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.