Parker v. Secretary of the U.S. Treasury

District of Columbia

Parker v. Secretary of the U.S. Treasury

CourtDistrict Court, District of Columbia

DecidedJune 29, 2011

DocketCivil Action No. 2011-1199

StatusPublished

This text of Parker v. Secretary of the U.S. Treasury (Parker v. Secretary of the U.S. Treasury) 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

Parker v. Secretary of the U.S. Treasury, (D.D.C. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

FILED

JUN 29 ZG‘.?

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT C|erk, U.S. Distnci & Bankruptcy

F@R THE DISTRICT 0F C@LUMBIA courts for me msmcr or columbia ROBERT E. PARKER, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v_ ) Civil Action No.

) 11 1199 SECRETARY OF THE U.S. ) TREASURY, et al., ) ) Defendants. )

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This matter comes before the court on review of plaintiffs’ applications to proceed in forma pauperis and pro se civil complaint. The court will grant the applications, and dismiss the complaint.

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, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972). Even pro se litigants, however, must comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Jarrell v. Tz`sch, 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 claim 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. Calz'fano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977).

According to plaintiffs, officials of the Intemal Revenue Service, among others, have failed to pursue taxes owed by politicians, corporate executives and judges, and have refused to act upon the evidence of bribery plaintiffs have uncovered. Plaintiff Robert Parl

An Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is issued separately.

?9<1»»-

United ates District Judge

DATE:

o/u ~/

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

FILED

JUN 29 ZG‘.?

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT C|erk, U.S. Distnci & Bankruptcy

F@R THE DISTRICT 0F C@LUMBIA courts for me msmcr or columbia ROBERT E. PARKER, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v_ ) Civil Action No.

) 11 1199 SECRETARY OF THE U.S. ) TREASURY, et al., ) ) Defendants. )

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This matter comes before the court on review of plaintiffs’ applications to proceed in forma pauperis and pro se civil complaint. The court will grant the applications, and dismiss the complaint.

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, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972). Even pro se litigants, however, must comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Jarrell v. Tz`sch, 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 claim 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. Calz'fano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977).

According to plaintiffs, officials of the Intemal Revenue Service, among others, have failed to pursue taxes owed by politicians, corporate executives and judges, and have refused to act upon the evidence of bribery plaintiffs have uncovered. Plaintiff Robert Parl

An Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is issued separately.

?9<1»»-

United ates District Judge

DATE:

o/u ~/

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Parker v. Secretary of the U.S. Treasury, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/parker-v-secretary-of-the-us-treasury-dcd-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack