Ruther v. Democratic National Committee

• Court: District Court, District of Columbia
• Decided: April 30, 2019
• Docket: Civil Action No. 2019-1068
• Status: Published

Opinion

FIE.ED

APR"3»I] 2019

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT C|€fk, U-S- D|Sfficf_& Bankfupfcy FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Courts for the Dlstrlct of Co|umb|a

L RUTHER, § l Plaintiff, § v. § Civil Action No. l : l 9-cv-01068 (UNA) DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL § COMMITTEE, ) , Defendant. §

MEMORANDUM OPINION

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. 5 l9, 520 (1972). Even pro se litigants, however, must comply With the F ederal 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); see Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678~79 (2009). The purpose of the minimum standard of Rule 8 is to give fair notice to the defendants of the claims 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.

Cazifano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.c. 1977).

The current allegations, basis for jurisdiction, and entitlement to relief, if contained Within plaintiff’ s complaint, are completely unclear to the Court. As drafted, the complaint fails to meet the minimum pleading standard set forth in Rule 8(a).

Therefore, the Court will grant the plaintiffs application to proceed in forma pauperis

and dismiss the complaint An Order consistent With this Mem

separately.

DATE: AprilOZ/§, 2019

nited Siates District Judge