Ciriello v. White House
This text of Ciriello v. White House (Ciriello v. White House) 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
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
MARK S. CIRIELLO, ) _ ) Plaintiff, ) ) V_ ) Civil Action No. /$’ -/ ) WHITE HOUSE, ) F I |_ E D ' ) Defendant. ) 2 2 20"} Clerk, U.S. District 8. Bankruptcy Courts for the District of Columbla W
This matter is before the Court on the plaintiff’s application to proceed informa pauperis and his pro se civil complaint. The application will be granted, and the complaint will be
dismissed as frivolous.
The plaintiff offers a critique of landscaping practices since the 19605, and generally complains that landscapers have planted trees, shrubs and flowers that are unattractive and unsuitable for the environment. He alleges that the “United States[] failed to conduct researching on the effects of landscaping,” and based on his research, "‘[a] re—call of landscaping
is . . . necessary.” Compl. at 1.
Review of the complaint, and the myriad nonsensical allegations therein, leads the Court to conclude that the complaint must be dismissed in its entirety under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) as frivolous. See Neitzke v. Williams, 490 US. 319, 325 (1989) (“[A] a complaint, containing as it does both factual allegations and legal conclusions, is frivolous where it lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact”). An Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is issued
separately.
DATEzg/ I”
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Ciriello v. White House, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ciriello-v-white-house-dcd-2014.