BOWMAN v. STATE OF INDIANA et al, No. 1:2012cv00277 - Document 5 (S.D. Ind. 2012)

Court Description: ENTRY Concerning Selected Matters - The complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and is dismissed because it violates the "short and plain statement" requirement. The complaint is dismissed based on the violatio n of Rule 8. Final judgment shall not issue at this time. The plaintiff shall have through June 11, 2012, in which to file an amended complaint. If no amended complaint is filed as permitted in Part III of this Entry, the action will be dismissed consistent with the dismissal of the complaint in Part I. If an amended complaint is filed the court will issue whatever further order is warranted. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 5/30/2012. (copy to Plaintiff via US Mail)(JKS)

Download PDF
BOWMAN v. STATE OF INDIANA et al Doc. 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA ERIC BOWMAN, Plaintiff, v. STATE OF INDIANA, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. 1:12-cv-277-JMS-DML Entry Concerning Selected Matters I. The complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and is dismissed because it violates the “short and plain statement” requirement of Rule 8(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and because it fails to state a plausible claim for relief against any of the defendants. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009)(A A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.@ )(citing Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 566 (2007)). Plaintiff Bowman’s complaint fails to provide a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the he is entitled to relief against any of the defendants: the State of Indiana, IMPD Police Department, Jerald Hunter, Michael Kavanaugh, or George June. Particularly confusing is the plaintiff’s allegation that “the ‘system’ has done wrong with the trickery of duress signing of paper that gives the IMPD full power to treat people like a criminal.” Complaint, at pages 1-2. The complaint is dismissed based on the violation of Rule 8. Final judgment shall not issue at this time. Dockets.Justia.com II. The plaintiff shall have through June 11, 2012, in which to file an amended complaint. An amended complaint, if filed, will completely supersede the original complaint and shall conform to the following guidelines: ! The amended complaint shall comply with the requirement of Rule 8(a)(2) that pleadings contain a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief; ! The amended complaint shall comply with the requirement of Rule 10 that the allegations in a complaint be made in numbered paragraphs, each of which should recite, as far as practicable, only a single set of circumstances; and ! The amended complaint must identify what legal injury he claims to have suffered and what persons are responsible for each such legal injury. III. If no amended complaint is filed as permitted in Part III of this Entry, the action will be dismissed consistent with the dismissal of the complaint in Part I. If an amended complaint is filed the court will issue whatever further order is warranted. IT IS SO ORDERED. 05/30/2012 Date: __________________ _______________________________ Distribution: ERIC R. BOWMAN 1486 Stanford Drive Avon, IN 46123 Hon. Jane Magnus-Stinson, Judge United States District Court Southern District of Indiana

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.