Washington v. USA Country
This text of Washington v. USA Country (Washington v. USA Country) 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.
Opinion
FILED MAR 1 6 2009 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NANCy MAYER WHITTINGTON CLERK FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA U.S. DISTRICT COUffr'
SHERRY WASHINGTON, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 09 0493 ) U.S.A., et al., ) ) Defendants. )
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter comes before the court on review of plaintiffs application to proceed in
forma pauperis and pro se civil complaint. The court will grant the application, and dismiss the
complaint.
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. 519, 520 (1972). Even pro se litigants, however,
must comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Jarrell v. Tisch, 656 F. Supp. 237, 239
(D.D.C. 1987). Rule 8(a) ofthe 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. 8(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. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977).
11/ The complaint is so vague and confusing that it utterly fails to "give the defendant fair
notice of what the plaintiffs claim is and the grounds upon which it rests." Conley v. Gibson,
355 U.S. 41, 47-48 (1957). For this reason, the complaint will be dismissed without prejudice
for failure to comply with Rule 8(a). An Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is
issued separately.
Date: " IL y~ j (l) f L- (Pt) G7
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Washington v. USA Country, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/washington-v-usa-country-dcd-2009.