Cougle v. McDaniel

Filing 5

ORDER AND REASONS Dismissing Case with prejudice as Frivolous. Signed by Judge Martin L.C. Feldman on 8/23/2017.(clc)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
CHRISTOPHER A. COUGLE

CIVIL ACTION

V.

NO. 17-5735

RONNA ROMNEY MCDANIEL

SECTION "F"
ORDER AND REASONS

The plaintiff, Christopher A. Cougle, has filed this lawsuit
pro se and in forma pauperis against chairwoman of the Republican
National

Committee,

Ronna

Romney

McDaniel.

The

Court

has

considered his claims and finds that the complaint should be
dismissed, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B) and 1915A(b)(1),
for being frivolous and for failing to state a claim upon which
relief could be granted.
I.
“A federal court may dismiss a claim in forma pauperis ‘if
satisfied that the action is frivolous or malicious.’” Moore v.
McDonald, 30 F.3d 616, 620 (5th Cir. 1994) (quoting 28 U.S.C. §
1915(d)). A complaint is frivolous “if it lacks an arguable basis
in law or fact.” Reeves v. Collins, 27 F.3d 174, 176 (5th Cir.
1994); Booker v. Koonce, 2 F.3d 114, 116 (5th Cir. 1993). “Section
1915(d) ‘accords judges not only the authority to dismiss a claim
based on an indisputably meritless legal theory, but also the
unusual

power

to

pierce

the

veil

of

the

complaint’s

factual

allegations and dismiss those claims whose factual contentions are

1

clearly baseless.’” Macias v. Raul A. (Unknown), Badge No. 153, 23
F.3d 94, 97 (5th Cir. 1994), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 883 (1994)
(quoting Nietzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 327 (1989)). Even under
the broadest reading, Cougle’s complaint is frivolous and clearly
lacks an arguable basis in law and fact.
Dismissal pursuant to § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) for failure to
state a claim is analyzed by the same standard used for dismissal
under

Federal

Rule

of

Civil

Procedure

12(b)(6).

Newsome

v.

E.E.O.C., 301 F.3d 227, 231 (5th Cir. 2002). “To survive a motion
to dismiss, a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter,
accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on
its

face.”

Ashcroft

v.

Iqbal,

556

U.S.

662,

678

(internal

quotations omitted).
Pro se pleadings are reviewed under a less stringent standard
than those drafted by attorneys and are entitled to a liberal
construction. See Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520-21 (1972).
However, pro se litigants must still provide sufficient facts to
support their claims; conclusory allegations are insufficient.
United States v. Pineda, 988 F.2d 22, 23 (5th Cir. 1993) (citations
omitted).
II.
The plaintiff alleges that the Republican Party had various
public figures killed and played a part in certain violent events
around

the

world.

The

plaintiff
2

also

lists

various

other

allegations related to products and services that Ronna Romney
McDaniel uses, such as the type of car she drives and medications
she takes. He additionally makes numerous allegations regarding
many

top

officials

associated

with

the

White

House

and

the

Republican Party.
III.
Even interpreting these claims with the liberal construction
to which this pro se pleading is entitled, the Court finds that
the plaintiff’s allegations are not only unlikely, but are also
irrational,

wholly

incredible,

fabricated,

and

at

times

delusional. See Haines, 404 U.S. at 520-21; Booker, 2. F.3d at
115-16 (quoting Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 32-33 (1992)).
Thus, the plaintiff’s complaint should be dismissed as frivolous
and for failure to state a claim. Id.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED: that the plaintiff’s complaint is
DISMISSED with prejudice.

New Orleans, Louisiana, August 23, 2017

______________________________
MARTIN L. C. FELDMAN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3