Inverson v. Internal Revenue Service

• Court: District Court, District of Columbia
• Decided: March 20, 2014
• Docket: Civil Action No. 2014-0462
• Status: Published

Opinion

FILED M¢.Rzuzov»

Cl€l'l(, U.S. DlSlflCf & Ballkfl|pl€y C0urts for the District of Go|umbla FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

GERALD IVERSON, JR., ) )

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) Civil Action No. ~"

INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE ) COMMISSIONER, ) )

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.

Plaintiff appears to accuse the Commissioner of lnternal Revenue and IRS attorneys and claims examiners of "committing fraud, gross negligence, [and] obstruction of justice," Compl. at 2-4 (page numbers designated by plaintiff), among other offenses, see id. at 3-4, for their alleged refusal to resolve disputes arising from plaintiff’ s demands for refunds, see generally id.

at l-4 to 3-4.

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. 5l9, 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 S(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). As drafted, the complaint fails to comply with Rule S(a), and it will be dismissed. An Order consistent with this Memorandum

Opinion is issued separately.

ét”l/@»te 5 flue/ca

United States District Judge

DATE; 2 /C> /Ll