Crump v. Wells et al

Filing 4

ORDER DISMISSING CASE. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on 09/23/08. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service)(rbe, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/23/2008)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Plaintiff, a state prisoner currently on parole, has filed a pro se civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. 1983 alleging that his parole officer/social worker improperly required him to apply for social security benefits based on mental disability. Plaintiff claims he is not mentally ill because he was discharged from the state hospital. He seeks damages and leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Based on plaintiff's affidavit of poverty, his motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (doc # 2) is GRANTED. But the complaint must be dismissed under the authority of 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2) for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. The attachments to the complaint make clear that plaintiff has filed a statement with the Social Security Administration (SSA) explaining that he does not believe he is mentally ill. SSA may or may not IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA STEPHEN CRUMP, Plaintiff(s), vs. BARBARA WELLS, et al., Defendant(s). ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. C 08-3849 CRB (PR) ORDER OF DISMISSAL (Doc # 2) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 believe him. But simply requiring him to apply for benefits based on an arguable disability does not amount to a violation of a right secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States. See West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988). The clerk shall enter judgment in accordance with this order, terminate all pending motions as moot, and close the file. SO ORDERED. DATED: 09/23/08 CHARLES R. BREYER United States District Judge G:\PRO-SE\CRB\CR.08\Crump, S1.dismiss.wpd 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?