Gibson-Michaels v. Bair
This text of Gibson-Michaels v. Bair (Gibson-Michaels v. Bair) 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 FILED FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA JAN - 8 2009 Clerk, U.S. District and ) Bankruptcy Courts Yolanda C. Gibson-Michaels, ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 09 0022 ) Shelia C. Bair et al., ) ) Defendants. )
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter comes before the Court on consideration of plaintiffs pro se complaint and
application to proceed in forma pauperis. The Court will grant the application and dismiss the
complaint.
The complaint, brought as a civil RICO action under 18 U. S.C. § 1961 et seq., states that
the several named defendants have operated over the past ten years in a criminal enterprise
involving "bank fraud, receivership fraud, money laundering, tampering with and retaliation"
with respect to a whistle blower, and "obstruction of justice, obstruction of state and local law
enforcement, peonage and slavery," the "primary objective" of which has been to "inflict severe
and sustained economic hardship upon plaintiff by threats, physical assault, harassment with the
intent to 'silence plaintiff .... " (CompI. at 2-3.) Plaintiffs complaint is constructed of
conclusory allegations without specific facts to support the allegations of illegal conduct.
A complaint that alleges only vague or conclusory allegations without specific facts
regarding the alleged wrongdoing does not allow a defendant to frame an intelligent defense and
is subject to dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) as "lacking an arguable basis in fact" and therefore failing to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S.
319, 325 (1989). Plaintiffs complaint alleging a "widespread criminal enterprise knowingly
engaged [in] by the ... FDIC" does not allege facts sufficient to provide a basis in fact, and will
therefore be dismissed.
An appropriate order accompanies this memorandum opinion.
Date: 1~11~/()t
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Gibson-Michaels v. Bair, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gibson-michaels-v-bair-dcd-2009.