Barbadoro v. State of Massachusetts
This text of Barbadoro v. State of Massachusetts (Barbadoro v. State of Massachusetts) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, District of Columbia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
FILED OCT 2 1 2009 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Clerk, u.s. District and Bankruptcy Courts FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Natalie Carol Barbadoro, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. ) The State of Massachusetts et aI., ) ) Defendants. )
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter comes before the Court on consideration of plaintiff s pro se complaint and
application to proceed in forma pauperis. The Court will grant the application to proceed in
forma pauperis and dismiss the complaint.
Plaintiff brings this "civil rights" and "human rights complaint," against the State of
Massachusetts and its "lower and state courts" and the District of Columbia and its "lower
courts," Compl. at 1, alleging "vicious violations of both" her civil and human rights, id. at 12,
and "stalking by both the legal and medical professions," id. at 1. The 12-page complaint
contains a substantial amount of information about the plaintiffs social and family history, and
her current destitute situation, but it contains no factual allegations of wrong doing by the
defendants named.
Rule 8(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires that a complaint contain a short
and plain statement of the grounds upon which the court's jurisdiction depends, a short and plain
statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief, and a demand for judgment
for the reliefthe pleader seeks. Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). One of the purposes 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, to prepare 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).
The complaint here fails to meet the requirements of Rule 8(a). It does not indicate what
the defendants did to cause injury to the plaintiff(s) or what reliefthe plaintiff(s) seek. The Court
cannot discern a cause of action or what relief is sought. In addition, the complaint does not set
forth a short and plain statement regarding this Court's jurisdiction over this matter, and the court
cannot discern any basis for its jurisdiction on the face of this complaint. Accordingly, the Court
will dismiss the complaint without prejudice for lack of subje
appropriate order accompanies this memorandum op· i .
~~ States District Judge
-2-
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Barbadoro v. State of Massachusetts, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barbadoro-v-state-of-massachusetts-dcd-2009.