ADAMS v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE et al, No. 1:2010cv00386 - Document 3 (D.D.C. 2010)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION Signed by Judge Henry H. Kennedy on 2/7/2010. (kb)
FILED MAR - 9 2010 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Clerk, U.S. District and Bankruptcy Courts Shirron Marie Adams, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 10 0386 Dep't of Justice et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff Shirron Marie Adams has filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis and a pro se complaint. The application will be granted and the complaint will be dismissed. The complaint alleges a "government scandal," Compi. at 4, and prays that "George W. Bush and the White House pay their bill in full," id at 5. In addition, the complaint alleges that the plaintiff filed a complaint with the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice, on which no action has been taken. Id at 2-3. Although the complaint also alleges that the Department has not responded as required, the complaint attaches a letter response from the Department advising the plaintiff that more specific information would be necessary in order to determine the existence of a possible violation of the plaintiffs civil rights. Id, Att. While complaints filed by pro se litigants are held to less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers, see Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972), even pro se complaints must meet minimum the standards set by 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 that a complaint contain a short and plain statement of the grounds upon N :3 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 and an adequate defense, and to determine whether the doctrine of res judicata applies. Brown v. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977). As drafted, this complaint does not identify a claim, establish this court's subject matter jurisdiction over the defendants, or provide the defendants with notice of the factual allegations against them. Accordingly, the complaint will be dismissed without prejudice for failure to comply with Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. A separate order accompanies this memorandum opinion. Date: / .J/t If. -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
Terms of Service