Anna Connolly v. Hector Lasalle, et al.

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA MACON DIVISION ANNA CONNOLLY, Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION NO. v. 5:26-cv-00361-TES HECTOR LASALLE, et al., Defendants.

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS AND DISMISSING COMPLAINT

Pro se Plaintiff Anna Connolly commenced this civil action on August 20, 2026, by filing a complaint [Doc. 1] and moving for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”)—that is, without prepaying fees and costs. [Doc. 2]. District courts may allow a plaintiff to file a lawsuit without prepaying fees and costs under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. That statute states, in relevant part, [A]ny court of the United States may authorize the commencement . . . of any suit, action or proceeding, civil or criminal, or appeal therein, without prepayment of fees or security therefor, by a person who submits an affidavit that includes a statement of all assets such [person] possesses [and] that the person is unable to pay such fees or give security therefor.

28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). An application is sufficient to warrant a waiver of fees if it “represents that the litigant, because of [her] poverty, is unable to pay for the court fees and costs, and to support and provide necessities for [her]self and [her] dependents.” Martinez v. Kristi Kleaners, Inc., 364 F.3d 1305, 1307 (11th Cir. 2004). Upon review of Plaintiff’s Motion, the Court GRANTS her leave to proceed IFP. [Doc. 2].

Since Plaintiff is proceeding IFP, § 1915(e) requires the Court to review her Complaint [Doc. 1] to determine whether it is frivolous or malicious or fails to state a claim for which relief may be granted.1 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(i)–(ii). The Eleventh

Circuit has determined that § 1915(e) generally “permits district courts to dismiss a case ‘at any time’ if [a] complaint ‘fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted.’” Robinson v. United States, 484 F. App’x 421, 422 n.2 (11th Cir. 2012) (per curiam) (quoting

28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii)). A claim must contain “sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to state a claim that is plausible on its face.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009). Plaintiff’s Complaint, in its entirety, reads, “The defendant created a hostile

working environment. So it should be held liable for its wrongdoings. And the damage will be determined at trial.” [Doc. 1]. These conclusory and generalized allegations fail to state a claim. Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES Plaintiff’s Complaint without

prejudice. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). SO ORDERED, this 20th day of August, 2026. S/ Tilman E. Self, III TILMAN E. SELF, III, JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

1 The Court notes that pleadings filed by pro se parties are construed liberally, and their allegations are held to a less stringent standard. Hughes v. Lott, 350 F.3d 1157, 1160 (11th Cir. 2003).