DOZIER-CARTER v. BET HOLDINGS INC., et al, No. 1:2008cv02246 - Document 4 (D.D.C. 2009)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION Signed by Judge Ellen S. Huvelle on 2/10/09. (ls, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
FILED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FEB 1 8 2009 NANty MAYER WHlTTlNGTON,_ U,S, DlSTRIST COURT ANGELA DOZIER, Plaintiff, v. BET HOLDINGS, INC., et ai., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil Action No. 08-2246 (UNA) MEMORANDUM OPINION 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 must dismiss a complaint if it is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. 28 U.S.c. § 1915(E)(1)(B). In Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319 (1989), the Supreme Court states that the trial court has the authority to dismiss not only claims based on an indisputably meritless legal theory, but also claims whose factual contentions are clearly baseless. Claims describing fantastic or delusional scenarios fall into the category of cases whose factual contentions are clearly baseless. !d. at 328. The trial court has the discretion to decide whether a complaint is frivolous, and such finding is appropriate when the facts alleged are irrational or wholly incredible. Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 33 (1992). Plaintiff claims to be Beyonce[] Knowles and "the wife of Dwayne Michael Carter[,] Jr.[,] aka Lil Wayne® who is aka Shawn Carter aka Jay Z.®" CompI. at 2. She alleges that 1 defendants have "conspired to erase [her] memory, steal and conceal [her] identity while invading [her] privacy using hidden surveillance equipment" for the purpose of "record[ ing] her reallife[] for radio and television shows[,] commercials, movies and music videos." Id. In addition, she alleges that defendants have used her image "to conjure up new music styles and artists" and to steal her "creative thoughts, lyrics, dances and dress designs." Id. For these and other acts, plaintiff demands injunctive relief and damages of $1,000,000,000,000. Id. at 3-4. The court is mindful that complaints filed by pro se litigants are held to less stringent standards than those applied to formal pleadings drafted by lawyers. See Haines v. Kerner, 404 u.s. 519, 520 (1972). Having reviewed plaintiffs complaint, it appears that its factual contentions are baseless and wholly incredible. For this reason, the complaint is frivolous and must be dismissed. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(I). An Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is issued separately. C/G~ S JfU(J~ United States District Judge Date: ~ /;6 /0 l 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
