Fletcher v. Department of Housing Urban Development

CourtDistrict Court, District of Columbia
DecidedNovember 16, 2011
DocketCivil Action No. 2011-2033
StatusPublished

This text of Fletcher v. Department of Housing Urban Development (Fletcher v. Department of Housing Urban Development) 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
Fletcher v. Department of Housing Urban Development, (D.D.C. 2011).

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA F l L E D ) NOV l 6 2011 Deborah Diane Fletcher, ) ) Clerk, U.S. Distrlct and plaintiff ) Bankruptcy §ourts ) v. ) Civil Action No. 5 ) . Dep’t of HUD, ) ) Defendant. ) ) MEMORANDUM OPINION

This matter is before the Court on its initial review of plaintiff’ s pro se complaint and application to proceed in forma pauperis The application will be granted and the case will be dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § l9l5(e)(2)(B)(ii). Under that statute, the Court is required to dismiss a case "at any time" it determines that the complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

Plaintiff is a resident of Miami, Florida, suing the "Dept. of HUD-l\/Ianager[,] Florida State of Dept. of HUD." Compl. Caption. The crux of plaintiffs rambling complaint is that she allegedly took a class in April 2011 for first-time home buyers in Miami and that defendant "refus[e]d to help [her] . . . purchase her home as a first-time-home-buyer, for a low income individual." Compl. at l, 5. She "is charging the defendant with prejudice [and] is asking for the price of a single family home and the price of prejudice." Ia'. at 5~6.

A plaintiff s "[f]actual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level . . . ." BelIAtlantz'c Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007) (citations omitted); see Aklieselskabet AF 2]. Nov. 2001 v. Fame Jeans, Inc., 525 F.3d 8, 16 n.4 (D.C. Cir.

2008) ("We have never accepted ‘legal conclusions cast in the form of factual allegations’

because a complaint needs some information about the circumstances giving rise to the claims.") (quoting Kowal v. MCI Commc'ns Corp., 16 F.3d 1271, 1276 (D.C. Cir. 1994)). Plaintiff does not state the basis of federal court jurisdiction and her alleged facts do not state a cognizable claim. Therefore, the complaint will be dismissed. A separate Order accompanies this

Memorandum Opinion.

) / United'States District J/e(dge Date: November@// , 2011

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

Related

Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly
550 U.S. 544 (Supreme Court, 2007)
Charles Kowal v. MCI Communications Corporation
16 F.3d 1271 (D.C. Circuit, 1994)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Fletcher v. Department of Housing Urban Development, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fletcher-v-department-of-housing-urban-development-dcd-2011.