Foster v. Hetherington et al

Filing 8

MEMORANDUM. Signed by Judge Benson Everett Legg on 2/29/12. (c/m 3/1/12 jnls, Deputy Clerk)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
OMARI B. FOSTER

:

Plaintiff pro se

:

v

:

KATHLEEN HETHERINGTON, et al.

:

Defendants

Civil Action No. L-11-3663

:
MEMORANDUM

Pending is Omari B. Foster’s (“Foster”) Complaint, as supplemented, and a motion to
proceed in forma pauperis. The Court will grant him leave to proceed in forma pauperis and
dismiss the Complaint for failure to state a cause of action.
A complaint must contain a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the
pleader is entitled to relief and the relief that is sought. See F. R. Civ. P. 8 (a) (2) and (3).
Where, as here, the litigant is self-represented, his pleadings are held to a less stringent standard
than those drafted by attorneys. A federal district court is charged with liberally construing a
complaint filed by a pro se litigant to allow the development of a potentially meritorious case.
See Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007); Hughes v. Rowe, 449 U.S. 5, 9 (1980); Cruz v.
Beto, 405 U.S. 319 (1972); Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151 (4th Cir. 1978). Even under
this liberal standard of review, the Court is unable to find any factual predicate to support a
federal claim. A district court may not rewrite a complaint to “conjure up questions never
squarely presented” to the court. Beaudett v. City of Hampton, 775 F.2d 1274, 1278 (4th Cir.
1985). Further, the court may dismiss a suit filed in forma pauperis, for lack of subject matter
jurisdiction or for failure to state a claim, if at any time the court determines that the complaint
“fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted,” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).

Under F. R. Civ. P. Rule 8, a complaint must allege facts with sufficient specificity to
inform defendants what they are accused of so that they can answer or respond to the allegations.
See Fed. R. Civ. P. 8; see also, e.g., Chao v. Rivendell Woods, Inc., 415 F.3d 342, 347-48 (4th
Cir. 2005) (a complaint must “sufficiently allege [ ] each element of the cause of action so as to
inform the opposing party of the claim and its general basis”). Nothing in the instant Complaint
provides Defendants with adequate notice of the allegations against them. Foster states generally
“the facts of the case is [sic] non-reinstatement to the Community College of Howard County”
after compliance with 20 U.S.C. §§ 1681- 16881 was requested and “fraudulent statements”
were made by Defendants. Complaint, p. 2.

He indicates a disciplinary hearing was held but

does not explain what facts were considered or particularize the “fraudulent statements”
allegedly made. Supplement, p. 2. In sum, the Complaint and supplement fail to provide any
facts supporting a federal claim for sexual discrimination. Additionally, Foster failed to comply
with this Court’s Order of January 25, 2012, directing him to: 1) explain the events on which his
allegations are based; 2) when these events occurred; and 3) his attempts made to resolve these
concerns through administrative process. For these reasons, the case will be dismissed in a
separate order to follow.
/s/
__________________________
Benson Everett Legg
United States District Judge

February 29, 2012

1

20 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq, in part provides: “No person * * * shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from
participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity
receiving Federal financial assistance.” Id. § 1681(a).

2