Brown v. Baradel, Kosmerl & Nolan

• Court: District Court, District of Columbia
• Decided: August 28, 2009
• Docket: Civil Action No. 2009-1639
• Status: Published

Opinion

FILED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA AUG 28 2009 Clerk, U.S. District and JEROME JULIUS BROWN, SR., Bankruptcy Courts

Plaintiff,

v. Civil Action No. 09 1639 BARADEL, KOSMERI & NOLAN, et al.,

Defendants.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This matter comes before the Court on plaintiffs application to proceed in forma pauperis

and pro se complaint. The Court will grant the application and dismiss the complaint.

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 showing that the pleader is entitled to relief, and a demand for judgment for the relief

the pleader seeks to obtain. Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). The purpose 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 detennine whether the doctrine of res

judicata applies. Brown v. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 CD.D.C. 1977).

Plaintiffs complaint fails to accomplish the basic purpose of Rule 8(a). It purports to be

a petition for a writ, but it is unclear from the pleading the relief plaintiff is seeking.

Accordingly, the complaint will be dismissed without prejudice for failure to comply with Fed.

R. Civ. P. 8(a). An Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion will be issued separately on

this date.

United States District Judge DATE:

\~