Fletcher v. Sprool

CourtDistrict Court, District of Columbia
DecidedDecember 4, 2017
DocketCivil Action No. 2017-2283
StatusPublished

This text of Fletcher v. Sprool (Fletcher v. Sprool) 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. Sprool, (D.D.C. 2017).

Opinion

mm~mmm.wm.»..¢m » . v. 1 4,. . <\ ,M.W... w ~Ww

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

FILED

DEBORAH D. FLETCHER ) ) mm uDEC 4 2017 Plaintiff, ) Cou -S. Dlstrlct mw &Bankru ) the Dlstrlct of co,u:'tb'a v. ) Civil Action No. 17-2283 (UNA) ) EDIE SPROOL, ) ) Defendant. ) MEMORANDUM OPINION

This matter comes before the Court upon review of plaintiffs application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and pro se complaint. The application Will be granted but the

complaint Will be dismissed

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, 4()4 U.S. 5l9, 520 (l972). Even pro se litigants, however, must comply With the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Jarrell v. Tisch, 656 F. Supp. 23 7, 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 claims 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).

*~…¢M~H .. ., . . m \.. … ~, »» , _ W-

Plaintiff purportedly brings “Assault, Libet [sic] & Slander” claims. Compl. at l. Missing from the complaint, which appears to be grounded in tort law, are factual allegations showing plaintiffs entitlement to relief and a statement regarding this Court’s federal jurisdiction As drafted, plaintiff’ s complaint does not meet the minimal pleading requirements

set forth in Rule S(a). The Court will dismiss the complaint without prejudice.

An Order is issued separately.

/W/H?

United Sv¢[ltes District Judge DATE: November 30 , 2017

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

Related

DeMasters v. State of Mont.
656 F. Supp. 21 (D. Montana, 1986)
Brown v. Califano
75 F.R.D. 497 (District of Columbia, 1977)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Fletcher v. Sprool, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fletcher-v-sprool-dcd-2017.