Terry v. Finny

Filing 5

MEMORANDUM OPINION re 2 Complaint. Signed by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 10/18/2012. (nms)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
JAMAL H. TERRY,
Plaintiff,

v.

Civ. No. 12-977-RGA

CINDY FINNY,
Defendant.

Jamal H. Terry, Wilmington, Delaware, ProSe Plaintiff.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

October I~ 2012
Wilmington, Delaware

,

I

I
I

Plaintiff Jamal H. Terry filed this action (D. I. 2) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 5098, a
non-existent statute, for violations of human rights under the Nuremberg Code. He also

f

i
l
I

alleges religious and racial discrimination. Plaintiff appears pro se and has been

I

granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis. (D. I. 4.) The Court proceeds to review and

r

screen the Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).

!

This Court must dismiss certain in forma pauperis actions that are frivolous,
malicious, or fail to state a claim. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). The Court must accept
all factual allegations in a complaint as true and take them in the light most favorable to
a prose plaintiff. See Phillips v. County of Allegheny, 515 F.3d 224, 229 (3d Cir. 2008).
An action is frivolous if it "lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact." Neitzke v.
Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989). Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), a court may
dismiss a complaint as frivolous if it is "based on an indisputably meritless legal theory"
or a "clearly baseless" or "fantastic or delusional" factual scenario. Neitzke, 490 U.S. at
327-28. Because Plaintiff proceeds prose, the pleading is liberally construed and the
Complaint, "however inartfully pleaded, must be held to less stringent standards than
formal pleadings drafted by lawyers." Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007)
(internal quotation marks omitted).
The named defendant is Cindy Finny, a family friend. The instant Complaint is
filed on a form, but it contains no written allegations. In response to the statement on
the form complaint, "Defendant's conduct is discriminatory with respect to the following,"
Plaintiff checked race, color, sex, religion, and national origin. (See D. I. 2 ~ 10)

t

i
,,

i

I
t

I
I
I
!

~

Given the paucity of the allegations- indeed, there are none, and that there
exists no federal no cause of action for discrimination committed by a friend of the
family - the Court finds that the Complaint is frivolous.
For the above reasons, the Court will dismiss the Complaint as frivolous
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). Amendment is futile.
An appropriate order will be entered.

2

l

I