Hall v. Trump

• Court: District Court, S.D. Ohio
• Decided: January 6, 2021
• Docket: 3:20-cv-00522
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON DEBORA SUE HALL, Plaintiff, Case No. 3:20-cv-522 vs. DONALD TRUMP, et al., District Judge Michael J. Newman Defendants. ______________________________________________________________________________ ORDER: (1) GRANTING PRO SE PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS (DOC. 1); (2) DISMISSING PRO SE PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT (DOC. 1-2) AS FRIVOLOUS; (3) ORDERING THAT SERVICE OF PROCESS NOT ISSUE; AND (4) TERMINATING THIS CASE ON THE COURT’S DOCKET ______________________________________________________________________________ This civil case is before the Court This civil case is before the Court on pro se Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Doc. 1. For good cause shown, the undersigned GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion. Doc. 1. Because Plaintiff is proceeding IFP, the Court is required to screen his complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) to determine whether it is “frivolous or malicious or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.” Johnson v. City of Wakefield, 483 F. App’x 256, 260 (6th Cir. 2012); Brewer v. Cleveland Mun. Sch. Dist., 84 F. App’x 570, 571 (6th Cir. 2003). In his pro se complaint, Plaintiff alleges that the federal government “has surveillance on [her] and her family” that has been ongoing “for 20 years.” Doc. 1-2 at PageID 7. Plaintiff further claims that the government puts chemicals in her home, water, and food; urinates and excretes in her home; and has caused her a number of personal injuries to her -- including causing pressure in her head, her leg to break, and her teeth to fall out. Id. These allegations can aptly be characterized as “describing fantastic or delusional scenarios”; thus, satisfying the definition of frivolousness. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325, 327-28 (1989). Accordingly, the undersigned finds that: (1) Plaintiff’s pro se complaint be DISMISSED as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915; (2) service of process not issue; and (3) this action be TERMINATED on the Court’s docket. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Date: January 6, 2021 s/ Michael J. Newman Michael J. Newman United States District Judge