Home/District of Columbia/Putman v. Grassley

Putman v. Grassley

District Court, District of Columbia·Decided December 27, 2018·No. Civil Action No. 2018-2891·Published

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

ARTHURN., PUTMAN, ) Plaintiff, V. Civil Action No.: 1:18-cv-2891 (UNA) CHUCK GRASSLEY, et ai., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION

This matter is before the Court on its initial review of plaintiff’s pro se complaint, which includes an emergency motion for hearing, and application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. The Court will grant the in forma pauperis application [2] and the complaint [1] will be dismissed without prejudice. Plaintiffs motion for emergency hearing [3] will be denied.

The instant complaint is substantially similar to another filed by plaintiff in a recent lawsuit, see Putman y. Grassley, et al., No. 18-cv-2890 (D.D.C. filed Dec. 10, 2018), and this matter will be dismissed as duplicative.

An Order is issued separately.

Gd bh. Hope

/ United States District Judge

Date: December 2. @ 2018

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

Putman v. Grassley, (D.D.C. 2018).

Putman v. Grassley (Putman v. Grassley) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.