Van Huisen v. Lafrades

CourtDistrict Court, N.D. California
DecidedApril 15, 2024
Docket5:23-cv-04800
StatusUnknown

This text of Van Huisen v. Lafrades (Van Huisen v. Lafrades) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, N.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Van Huisen v. Lafrades, (N.D. Cal. 2024).

Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 GREGORY SCOTT VAN HUISEN, Case No. 23-cv-04800-PCP

8 Plaintiff, ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT 9 v. WITH LEAVE TO AMEND, AND GRANTING MOTION TO PROCEED 10 ERIC LAFRADES, IN FORMA PAUPERIS 11 Defendant. Re: Dkt. No. 3

12 13 Gregory Van Huisen, an inmate at the Mule Creek State Prison, filed this pro se civil rights 14 action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The Complaint is now before the Court for review under 28 U.S.C. 15 § 1915A. Mr. Van Huisen’s Complaint is dismissed because it does not state a claim for relief. 16 I. BACKGROUND 17 Under “Statement of Claim,” Mr. Van Huisen writes the following:

18 Constructive treason; can be construed as a trespass case. In light of 19 perspective a landmark case. Companion case, Van Huisen v. House of Representatives; 525 U.S. 316 1999 Department of Census v. 20 H.O.R., case in point civil conspiracy, and election contest ([illegible]) was given property to hold, treacherous intent. Property 21 was sic. Given for diminution. Consider Black Codes, stealth factor, & omerta. Defamatory communication, sic. Isiah 59:5, causation, 22 sic. They hatch vipers eggs and from that which is crushed a viper 23 breaks out (egg/ “malapportioned”), sic rights. This resident is “adverse witness,” Oklahoma; civil conspiracy, consider omerta, 24 silent conspiracy for constructive transfer. 25 Compl. at 2. 26 When prompted to request specific relief, Mr. Van Huisen writes the following:

27 Violation of depravities & immunities; real property, coveting; companion case Docket 2:23cv01869-ckd, compensatory damages, 1 punitive damages, reasonable attorney fees, cost of suit and further 2 relief deemed nec.” Id. 3 4 II. Legal Standard Federal courts must screen any case in which a prisoner seeks redress from a governmental 5 entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The court must 6 identify cognizable claims and dismiss claims that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim 7 upon which relief may be granted, or seek monetary relief from a defendant immune from such 8 relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1), (2). Pro se pleadings must be liberally construed. See Balistreri v. 9 Pacifica Police Dep’t, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1990). 10 11 III. Analysis Mr. Van Huisen does not state any claim for relief. Although he mentions treason, trespass, 12 conspiracy, elections, property, and defamation, Mr. Van Huisen does not identify any injury that 13 has been done to him, nor does he identify a person responsible for any injury. Although Mr. Van 14 Huisen directs the Court to “companion case[s],” he voluntarily dismissed those cases.1 15 If Mr. Van Huisen chooses to amend, he must explain how he was injured, what violation 16 of a constitutional provision or federal law caused that injury, and what remedy he seeks for the 17 injury. Mr. Van Huisen also must explain who injured him, when, and where. Mr. Van Huisen 18 should provide this information in plain English, rather than attempting to write in legalese. 19 Mr. Van Huisen states that he did not grieve his injury because something is “out of 20 jurisdiction.” Compl. at 2. Mr. Van Huisen must explain what this means. For example, was he 21 injured at a previous place of incarceration, and moved before he had the chance to grieve his 22 injury? Or would exhaustion be futile because the wrongdoer is no longer employed at the prison 23 where Mr. Van Huisen is incarcerated? 24 25 26 27 1 IV. Conclusion 2 The Complaint is dismissed with leave to amend. 3 Mr. Van Huisen’s in forma pauperis application is GRANTED. The initial partial filing 4 fee is $3.00. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1) (requiring a court to assess an initial filing fee of 20 5 percent of a prisoner’s average monthly deposits or monthly balance, whichever is greater). A 6 copy of this order and the attached instructions will be sent to Mr. Van Huisen and the institution’s 7 trust account office. 8 Mr. Van Huisen may file a FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT within thirty-five days 9 from the date this order is filed. The first amended complaint must include the caption and civil 10 case number used in this order (CV 23-4800-PCP (PR)) and the words FIRST AMENDED 11 COMPLAINT on the first page. If Mr. Van Huisen files a first amended complaint, he must 12 specify the claims he intends to pursue, and must allege facts that demonstrate he is entitled to 13 relief on every claim. An amended complaint supersedes the original complaint. See London v. 14 Coopers & Lybrand, 644 F.2d 811, 814 (9th Cir. 1981) (“[A] plaintiff waives all causes of action 15 alleged in the original complaint which are not alleged in the amended complaint.”); Ferdik v. 16 Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1262-63 (9th Cir. 1992) (where an amended complaint did not name all 17 the defendants to an action, they were no longer defendants). 18 Failure to file an amended complaint within thirty-five days and in accordance with 19 this order will result in a finding that further amendment would be futile. If Mr. Van Huisen 20 fails to amend, this action will be dismissed with prejudice. 21 It is Mr. Van Huisen’s responsibility to prosecute this case. Mr. Van Huisen must keep the 22 Court informed of any change of address by filing a separate paper with the Clerk headed “Notice 23 of Change of Address,” and must comply with the Court’s orders in a timely fashion. Failure to do 24 so will result in the dismissal of this action for failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of 25 Civil Procedure 41(b). 26 27 1 IT IS SO ORDERED. 2 || Dated: April 15, 2024 leo~ | Mog om P. CASEY PITTS 5 United States District Judge 6 7 8 9 10 11 a 12

© 15 16

it

4 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

3 INSTRUCTIONS FOR PAYMENT OF PRISONER’S FILING FEE

4 The prisoner shown as the plaintiff or petitioner on the attached order has filed a civil action in forma pauperis in this court and owes to the court a filing fee. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 5 § 1915, the fee is to be paid as follows: 6 The initial partial filing fee listed on the attached order should be deducted by the prison 7 trust account office from the prisoner’s trust account and forwarded to the clerk of the court as the first installment payment on the filing fee. This amount is twenty percent of the greater of (a) the 8 average monthly deposits to the prisoner’s account for the 6-month period immediately preceding the filing of the complaint/petition or (b) the average monthly balance in the prisoner’s account for 9 the 6-month period immediately preceding the filing of the complaint/petition.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Van Huisen v. Lafrades, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/van-huisen-v-lafrades-cand-2024.