Shade v. Vilsack

District Court, District of Columbia·Decided June 26, 2017·No. Civil Action No. 2017-1140·Published

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT " FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA F § L E §

ALBERT SHADE, : JUN 2 6 2017 ; CC|erk, U.S. Dlst_rlct & Bankruptcy Plaintiff’ : ourts for the Drstrlct of Columb|a v. ' ; civil Action No. 17-1140 (UNA) lTOM VILSACK, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION

The Court construes the complaint as plaintiff s latest attempt to sue the United States Department of Agriculture for its discriminatory\lending practices in 1982. The court previously held that there is no legal basis to do so outside of the Consent Decree reached in Pigford v. Glz`ckman, Civ. No. 97-1978 (D.D.C. 1999). See Shaa'e v. U.S. Cong., 942 F. Supp. 2d 43, 49 (D.D.C. 2013), a ’d sub nom. Shaa'e v. Cong., No. 13-5185, ;9.013 WL 5975978 (D.C. Cir. Oct.

15;2013)

The Court Will grant plaintiffs application to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the

complaint An Order consistent With this Memorandum Opinion is issued separately.

_/\/~ DATE; jaw/cc £3,52@'? /M %_,__

United S)%s District Judge

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

Shade v. Vilsack, (D.D.C. 2017).

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

Related

Shade v. United States Congress
942 F. Supp. 2d 43 (District of Columbia, 2013)