Wayne v. Three Male Suspects

CourtDistrict Court, District of Columbia
DecidedAugust 11, 2025
DocketCivil Action No. 2025-2375
StatusPublished

This text of Wayne v. Three Male Suspects (Wayne v. Three Male Suspects) 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.

Bluebook
Wayne v. Three Male Suspects, (D.D.C. 2025).

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

JESUS A. WAYNE, Jr., ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 25-2375 (UNA) ) THREE MALE SUSPECTS, ) ) Defendants. )

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 three male suspects on Wednesday July 23, 2025,”

Compl. at 4, one of whom drove a black pickup truck with a Maryland license plate, see id. He

demands “No relief . . . No Lawsuit.” Id. 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: August 11, 2025 /s/ JIA M. COBB United States District Judge

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

Related

Haines v. Kerner
404 U.S. 519 (Supreme Court, 1972)
Jarrell v. Tisch
656 F. Supp. 237 (District of Columbia, 1987)
Brown v. Califano
75 F.R.D. 497 (District of Columbia, 1977)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Wayne v. Three Male Suspects, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wayne-v-three-male-suspects-dcd-2025.