FREEMAN v. WALMART STORES, No. 1:2011cv01259 - Document 4 (D.D.C. 2011)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION Signed by Judge Emmet G. Sullivan on 7/11/2011. (ls, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
FILED JUL 12 2011 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Sallijo Freeman, Plaintiff, v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil Action No. Clerk, U.S. District & Bankruptcy Courts for the District of Columbia 11 1259 MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter is before the Court on review of plaintiff s application for a temporary restraining order ("TRO") or a preliminary injunction ("PI"), which is accompanied by her complaint and application for leave to proceed informa pauperis. The Court will grant the in forma pauperis application, deny the TRO/PI motion, 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 8(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires complaints to contain ''(1) 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. 8(a); see Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1950 (2009); Ciralsky 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 I ~ ( -------- ------------- ------------- defense and determine whether the doctrine of res judicata applies. Brown v. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977). Plaintiff, a District of Columbia resident, sues Wal-Mart Stores. She lists her allegations as "Violation ofthe American with Disabilities Act" and "Breach of Agreement," CompI. at L but she has stated no supporting facts and, thus, has failed to provide any notice of a claim. Plaintiff seeks permission to file an amended complaint, but she does not explain why she submitted a wholly deficient complaint in the first place. Furthermore, plaintiff states no basis for issuing a temporary restraining order or a preliminary injunction "to enjoin the defendant from the destruction of documents pertaining to" what appears to be her employment application. TRO Mot. at 1. Hence, the Court will dismiss the instant action without prejudice to plaintiff refiling a complaint that complies with Rule 8. A sep'~~ate Order Memorandum Opinion. ~f dismi-ssal~ompanies I - / I/ ~ / ,- '-Of /~ " / \ Date: July Ji-, ) United States Distric Judge 2011 2 this
]]>
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.
