JULIUS v. BRANCH METRO BUS TRAIN

Filing 3

MEMORANDUM OPINION Signed by Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly on 4/30/2012. (ls, )

FILED
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

TYRONE JULIUS,
Plaintiff,
v.

MRS. BRANCH METRO BUS AND TRAIN,
Defendant.

MAY 1 4 2012
Clerk, U.S. District & Bankruptcy
Courts for the District of Columbia

Civil Action No.

12 0773

MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter comes before the court on review of three civil complaints filed by plaintiff
along with applications to proceed in forma pauperis. The court will grant the applications and
dismiss the complaints.
The court has reviewed plaintiffs complaints, keeping in mind that complaints filed by

pro se litigants are held to less stringent standards than those applied to formal pleadings drafted
by lawyers. See Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519,520 (1972). Even prose litigants, however,
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

1

doctrine of res judicata applies. Brown v. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497,498 (D.D.C. 1977).
These complaints contain neither a short and plain statement of a claim showing
plaintiffs entitlement to relief nor any indication of the claims asserted against the defendants.
As drafted, the complaints fail to comply with Rule 8(a) and all will be dismissed.
An Order is issued separately.

DATE:~ 5DJ .:>_o 1.}..

2