Colbert v. Treasury Department Federal Credit Union

District of Columbia

Colbert v. Treasury Department Federal Credit Union

CourtDistrict Court, District of Columbia

DecidedOctober 28, 2010

DocketCivil Action No. 2010-1840

StatusPublished

This text of Colbert v. Treasury Department Federal Credit Union (Colbert v. Treasury Department Federal Credit Union) 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.

Bluebook

Colbert v. Treasury Department Federal Credit Union, (D.D.C. 2010).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT F I L E D

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 2 8 ANroNIo COLBERT, ) ciiiii§ ing‘i)§§,t,-§ §§"'(’,'f,',fj‘,’,f§,ya Plaintiff, § v_ § Civil Action No. TREASURY DEPARTMENT FEDERAL § CREDIT UNION, § 184 Defendant. ) MEMORANDUM OPINION

This matter comes before the court on review of plaintiff s application to proceed in forma pauperis and pro se civil complaint The court will grant the application, and dismiss the complaint,

The Court has reviewed plaintiff’s complaint, keeping in mind that complaints filed by pro se litigants are held to less stringent standards than those applied to formal pleadings drafted by lawyers. See Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972). Even pro se litigants, however, must comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Jarrell v. Tz`sch, 656 F. Supp. 237, 239 (D.D.C. 1987). 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 relief the pleader seeks. Fed. R. Civ. P. S(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 determine whether the doctrine of res judicata applies. Brown v. Calzfano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. l977).

Plaintiff alleges that credit union employees have committed misconduct by purposely

misleading him, and "tryfulling [sic] with [him] after the fact." Compl. at 2. He explains that he has not been allowed to open an account, and "[s]omething need to be done about this!" Ia'.

As drafted, the complaint contains no short and plain statement of the grounds upon which the Court’s jurisdiction depends or a claim that plaintiff is entitled to the relief he seeks. For these reasons, the complaint will be dismissed without prejudice for its failure to comply with Rule 8(a).

An Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is issued separately. United SE-t'es District Judge

DATE:

1®7/>)£"

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT F I L E D

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 2 8 ANroNIo COLBERT, ) ciiiii§ ing‘i)§§,t,-§ §§"'(’,'f,',fj‘,’,f§,ya Plaintiff, § v_ § Civil Action No. TREASURY DEPARTMENT FEDERAL § CREDIT UNION, § 184 Defendant. ) MEMORANDUM OPINION

This matter comes before the court on review of plaintiff s application to proceed in forma pauperis and pro se civil complaint The court will grant the application, and dismiss the complaint,

The Court has reviewed plaintiff’s complaint, keeping in mind that complaints filed by pro se litigants are held to less stringent standards than those applied to formal pleadings drafted by lawyers. See Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972). Even pro se litigants, however, must comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Jarrell v. Tz`sch, 656 F. Supp. 237, 239 (D.D.C. 1987). 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 relief the pleader seeks. Fed. R. Civ. P. S(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 determine whether the doctrine of res judicata applies. Brown v. Calzfano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. l977).

Plaintiff alleges that credit union employees have committed misconduct by purposely

misleading him, and "tryfulling [sic] with [him] after the fact." Compl. at 2. He explains that he has not been allowed to open an account, and "[s]omething need to be done about this!" Ia'.

As drafted, the complaint contains no short and plain statement of the grounds upon which the Court’s jurisdiction depends or a claim that plaintiff is entitled to the relief he seeks. For these reasons, the complaint will be dismissed without prejudice for its failure to comply with Rule 8(a).

An Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is issued separately. United SE-t'es District Judge

DATE:

1®7/>)£"

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Colbert v. Treasury Department Federal Credit Union, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/colbert-v-treasury-department-federal-credit-union-dcd-2010.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack