Wayne, Jr. v. Male Coasian

• Court: District Court, District of Columbia
• Decided: February 18, 2025
• Docket: Civil Action No. 2025-0084
• Status: Published

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

JESUS A. WAYNE, Jr., ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 25-0084 (UNA) ) MALE COASIAN SUSPECT, ) ) Defendant. )

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This matter is before the Court on review of plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma

pauperis and pro se civil complaint. The Court GRANTS the application and, for the reasons

stated below, DISMISSES the complaint and this civil action without prejudice.

The Court has reviewed plaintiff’s complaint, keeping in mind that complaints filed by pro

se litigants are held to less stringent standards than are applied to formal pleadings drafted by

lawyers. See Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972). Even pro se litigants must comply with

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Jarrell v. Tisch, 656 F. Supp. 237, 239 (D.D.C. 1987). Rule

8(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. 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).

1 Plaintiff alleges “Trespassing by Male Coasian Suspect” on January 13, 2025, at what

appears to be plaintiff’s residence. See Compl. at 4. The defendant is not identified by name, and

contrary to Local Civil Rule 5.1, plaintiff fails to “provide in the caption the name and full

residence address or official address of each defendant,” LCvR 5.1(c)(1), although he does supply

the make, model and color of the vehicle defendant was driving and a license plate number.

Missing, however, are factual allegations describing the alleged trespass or any harm plaintiff may

have sustained. Plaintiff demands “No relief . . . No Lawsuit.” Id.

The complaint is so short on factual allegations that defendant, if he could be identified,

does not have fair notice of the claim(s) against him. As drafted, the complaint fails to meet the

minimum pleading standard set forth in Rule 8, and it will be dismissed.

An Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is issued separately.

DATE: February 18, 2025 /s/ RUDOLPH CONTRERAS United States District Judge