Manning v. Richardson

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS NORTHERN DIVISION

MICHAEL TODD MANNING PLAINTIFF

v. Case No. 3:22-cv-259-JM

CINDY LUANN RICHARDSON, et al. DEFENDANTS

ORDER

Plaintiff Michael Todd Manning’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis is granted.1 He reports living on social security disability income.2 The law requires that I screen the Complaint.3 Mr. Manning contends that Cindy LuAnn Richardson “and her group” have placed a radio tracker on him without his permission.4 He says that he has continually been stalked, harassed, and tormented with radiation, which has prevented him from thinking freely.5 An action is frivolous if its allegations are “fanciful . . . fantastic or delusional,” its “factual contentions are clearly baseless,” or it is “based on an indisputably meritless legal theory.”6 A “finding of frivolousness is appropriate when the facts alleged rise to the level of the irrational or the wholly incredible.”7 Mr. Manning’s claims fall into this category. Accordingly, his complaint will be dismissed without prejudice.

1 See Martin-Trigona v. Stewart, 691 F.2d 856, 857 (8th Cir. 1982) (per curiam) (complaint can be filed if plaintiff qualifies by economic status under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)).

2 Pl.’s Mtn. for Leave to Proceed IFP, Doc. 1.

3 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).

4 Complaint, Doc. 2.

5 Id.

6 Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 32-33 (1992); Nietzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 327-29 (1989).

7 Denton, 504 U.S. at 33. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: 1. Mr. Manning’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 1) is GRANTED. 2. The Complaint (Doc. 2) is DISMISSED without prejudice. 3. The Court certifies that an in forma pauperis appeal from this Order and accompanying Judgment would not be taken in good faith.® Dated, this 11" day of October, 2022. omer toleracr JUDGE

8 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3).