Williamson v. CenterPoint Energy et al, No. 4:2016cv01799 - Document 17 (S.D. Tex. 2016)
Court Description: OPINION on Dismissal. (Signed by Judge Lynn N Hughes) Parties notified. (ghassan, 4)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Williamson v. CenterPoint Energy et al Doc. 17 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS United States District Court Southern District of Texas ENTERED Karen Williamson, Plaintiff, lJcrsus CenterPoint Energy, ct al., Defendants. § § § § § § § § § August 23, 2016 David J. Bradley, Clerk Civil Action H-I6-1799 Opinion on Dismissal I. Karen Williamson lives at the end of a dead-end street in Pinehurst. She complains that CenterPoint Energy - its officers and some of its employees trespassed on her land when inspecting power lines and also telled old oak trees. She says that (a) men harassed her and did not always identify themselves when asked, and (b) CenterPoint installed a SMART meter on her home without permission. CenterPoint has given her the forms to submit to have the meter removed. 2. In her many motions and in a hearing held on August r6, 20r6, the court attempted to portray her suit as claims for sex, age, and disability discrimination, as well as other claims that her constitutional rights had been violated by CenterPoint and its affiliates. The wrongs she claims manifest in anxious rumblings about men dressed in all black, conspiracy theories, and fears of terrorist plots. 3. To state a claim for relief, Williamson must submit precise facts that reasonably allow the court to infer that the defendants may be liable. The court construes her complaint for the claims that she names and for those she could have named. Dockets.Justia.com 4. She has no facts that support a viable legal claim for recovery. She purchased her property subject to CenterPoint's easement and does not establish that the company has violated it. She asked the company to inspect the wires, and it did. She cannot complain of an inspection that she asked of it. Her other claims of misconduct are not tethered to reality. 5. She has sued unknown defendants and did not name the necessary plaintiffs. She did not serve five of the defendants named in the complaint, and does not articulate why she named them. She also concedes her husband is a joint-tenant with an interest in the property. If she is claiming damage to the property, he is required to join. Without the proper parties, this suit is not properly before the court. 6. Because the Constitution secures the people's freedom from the infringement of rights by the government - not companies - and she has no facts that establish other misconduct, she will take nothing from CenterPoint, its employees, and its affiliates. Signed on August 23, 20r6, at Houston, Texas. Lynn N. Hughes United States DistrictJudge - 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.
