Colbert v. U.S. District Court of Appeals

• Court: District Court, District of Columbia
• Decided: October 28, 2010
• Docket: Civil Action No. 2010-1839
• Status: Published

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FILED OCT 28 2010 ANTONIO COLBERT, ) Clerk. U.S. District & Bankruptcy ) Courts for the District of Columbia Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. ) 10 1839 U.S. DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS, ) ) 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 plaintiffs 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. Tisch, 656 F. Supp. 237, 239

(D.D.C. 1987). Rule 8(a) ofthe 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. 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 determine whether the

doctrine of res judicata applies. Brown v. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977).

Plaintiff alleges that court employees "refuse to give accurate instructions as to why they

N need information that's already been given, then after this confusion and runaround, they try to

mislead" him. Compl. at 2. He demands an award fo $50,000. Id.

The complaint does not contain a 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.