Campbell v. The City & County Supervisors et al

Filing 4

ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO AMEND AND GRANTING APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS. Signed by Magistrate Judge Bernard Zimmerman on 6/30/2009. (bzsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/1/2009) (Additional attachment(s) added on 7/1/2009: # 1 Proof of Service) (bzsec, COURT STAFF).

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 v. THE CITY & COUNTY SUPERVISORS, et al., Defendant(s). ARLENE CAMPBELL, Plaintiff(s), ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA No. C09-2390 BZ ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO AMEND AND GRANTING APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS On May 29, 2009, pro se plaintiff, Arlene Campbell, filed a complaint against defendants, the Mayor and Supervisors of San Francisco, and applied to proceed in forma pauperis, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(a). Having reviewed the complaint and application, I find that plaintiff has failed to state a claim for which relief may be granted, and I therefore DISMISS her complaint with leave to amend. However, because plaintiff has shown her financial need, I GRANT her in forma pauperis application. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915, the Court may dismiss a complaint if it is frivolous or if it fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted. 1 28 U.S.C. 1915 (e)(2)(B). 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 Construed liberally in her favor, plaintiff's complaint fails to allege facts sufficient to state a claim.1 Plaintiff appears to allege that defendants blocked her access to some TV channels. From the few details she offers in her complaint, however, I cannot be sure of the nature of her claim. Plaintiff must give defendants fair notice of the See McKeever v. In her complaint, grounds on which the complaint is based. Block, 932 F.2d 795, 798 (9th Cir. 1991). plaintiff does not provide facts sufficient to inform defendants of the grounds of her complaint. Plaintiff's complaint therefore fails to meet the basic requirement that it state a claim for which relief can be granted. On her cover sheet, plaintiff checked the Freedom of Information Act box. However, the Freedom of Information Act is a federal act and does not apply to state or local governments. Because I find that plaintiff's complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows: 1. amend. Plaintiff' complaint is DISMISSED with leave to If plaintiff desires to proceed with this, she must file an amended complaint by July 31, 2009 that demonstrates that she is legally entitled to relief in federal court. amended complaint should be a short, legible statement in The The Court must liberally construe a pro se complaint, giving the plaintiff the benefit of any doubt. See Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dep't, 901 F.2d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 1990); Karim-Panahi v. Los Angeles Police Dep't, 839 F.2d 621, 623 (9th Cir. 1988). 2 1 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 plain English that explains which of her civil rights she thinks were violated and what she thinks Mayor Newsom or any of the San Francisco supervisors have done that caused her harm. Plaintiff should also specify how she has been harmed. In amending her complaint, plaintiff may wish to consult a manual the Court has adopted to assist pro se litigants in presenting their case. This manual is available in the If Clerk's Office and online at plaintiff does not amend or otherwise comply with this Order by July 31, 2009, this case may be dismissed. 2. By no later than July 31, 2009, plaintiff shall consent to or decline to magistrate judge jurisdiction available online at: 3. Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis The marshal shall not serve the complaint pending is GRANTED. further order of the Court. Dated: June 30, 2009 Bernard Zimmerman United States Magistrate Judge G:\BZALL\-BZCASES\CAMPBELL v. NEWSOM\ORDER DENYING IFP AND DISMISSING.wpd 3

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?