# Brown v. Baradel, Kosmerl & Nolan > District Court, District of Columbia ยท August 28, 2009 URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/2667373 ## Case - **Court:** District Court, District of Columbia - **Decided:** August 28, 2009 - **Precedential status:** Published - **Opinion:** Opinion - **Judges:** Judge James Robertson - **Nature of suit:** Civil - **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library ## Citator (automated) - No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases. - Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/2667373 ## Opinion text FILED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA AUG 28 2009 Clerk, U.S. District and JEROME JULIUS BROWN, SR., Bankruptcy Courts Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 09 1639 BARADEL, KOSMERI & NOLAN, et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter comes before the Court on plaintiffs application to proceed in forma pauperis and pro se complaint. The Court will grant the application and dismiss the complaint. 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 showing that the pleader is entitled to relief, and a demand for judgment for the relief the pleader seeks to obtain. 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 detennine whether the doctrine of res judicata applies. Brown v. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 CD.D.C. 1977). Plaintiffs complaint fails to accomplish the basic purpose of Rule 8(a). It purports to be a petition for a writ, but it is unclear from the pleading the relief plaintiff is seeking. Accordingly, the complaint will be dismissed without prejudice for failure to comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). An Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion will be issued separately on this date. United States District Judge DATE: