Quartey v. Post Office H/R, No. 8:2010cv01331 - Document 4 (D. Md. 2010)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Peter J. Messitte on 5/27/2010. (c/m 5/28/2010 rk) (rank, Deputy Clerk)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND MARY AKU QUARTEY * v. * CIVIL ACTION NO. PJM-10-1331 POST OFFICE H/R (MR. SERVICE) * *** MEMORANDUM OPINION On May 19, 2010, Plaintiff, a resident of Silver Spring, Maryland, filed this pro se action using an employment discrimination complaint form. The Complaint sets out no claim statement. Rather, Plaintiff claims that I have been delayed from been released to work form March 2010. Evidence are attached to the form. Paper No. 1 at 2. She seeks back pay. Attached to the Complaint are pay statements and a document containing the names of individuals who Plaintiff claims are involved in my murder. Id. Because she appears indigent, Plaintiff s Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis shall be granted. Plaintiff provides no grounds for filing the employment discrimination Complaint, nor does she set out the facts of her Complaint, discuss how she has timely exhausted her administrative remedies before filing this case, or provide a relief request. Her attachments shed no light on the omitted information. This Court may preliminarily review the Complaint allegations before service of process and dismiss them if satisfied that the Complaint has no factual or legal basis. See Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 324 (1989); see also Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 33 (1992); Cochran v. Morris, 73 F.3d 1310, 1314 (4th Cir. 1996); Nasim v. Warden, 64 F.3d 951 (4th Cir. 1995). As explained by the Supreme Court in Neitzke: "Examples of [factually baseless lawsuits] are claims describing fantastic or delusional scenarios, with which federal district judges are all too familiar. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. at 328. Plaintiff s Complaint provides no jurisdictional or factual basis for its filing. Her attachments are deficient. The action shall be dismissed without prejudice for the failure to state a claim and without service of process on Defendant.1 A separate order shall follow. May 27, 2010 /s/ PETER J. MESSITTE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 1 Plaintiff has filed approximately thirteen cases in this Court since December 2, 2009. Given the frivolous nature of her filings, the Court concludes that affording Plaintiff the opportunity to amend her Complaint would be an exercise in futility. 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.
