Opinion

Phillips v. Distict of Columbia

Court
District Court, District of Columbia
Filed
Nov 16, 2011
Status
Published
On the bench
Judge Beryl A. Howell
Nature of suit
Civil
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 31.4%

a plaintiffs "[f]actual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level . . . ."

How later courts described this case

  • a plaintiffs "[f]actual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level . . . ."

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT CoURT L

FOR THE DISTRICT oF COLUMBIA 4 t

NUV j b 2011

) Clerk, u.s. ::»' t ' t

David P. Phillips, ) Bankruptc;l/S€bliirt?snd

)

Plaintiff, )

) n h

v. ) CivilAct1on No. lt

)

District of Columbia (U.S.A.), )

)

Defendant. )

)

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This matter is before the Court on its initial review of plaintiff s pro se complaint and

application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis The Court will grant the in forma pauperis

application and dismiss the case because the complaint fails to meet the minimal pleading

requirements of Rule 8(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Pro se litigants must comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Jarrell v. Tisch,

656 F. Supp. 237, 239 (D.D.C. 1987). Rule S(a) ofthe Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires

complaints to contain "(l) a short and plain statement of the grounds for the court's jurisdiction

[and] (2) a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief."

Fed. R. Civ. P. S(a); see Ashcrofl‘ v. Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1950 (2009); Cz`ralsky v. CIA, 355

F.3d 661, 668-71 (D.C. Cir. 2004). The Rule 8 standard ensures that defendants receive fair

notice of the claim being asserted so that they can prepare a responsive answer and an adequate

defense and determine whether the doctrine of res judicata applies. Brown v. Calzfano, 75

F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. l977).

Plaintiff is a homeless individual suing the District of Columbia for $l billion. He

alleges only that "[u]pon arrival have been harassed and involved against my will in many

altercations without an appropriate investigation." This cryptic allegation fails to provide any

notice of a claim. See BelI Atlarztz'c C0rp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007) (a plaintiffs

"[f]actual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level . . . .")

(citations omitted). Therefore, the complaint will be dismissed A separate Order accompanies

this Memorandum Opinion.

4 %m»&/

/ Umted States Distr/%t Judge

Date: November/f /1/ , 2011

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.