Grimes v. Farmer et al

Filing 3

MEMORANDUM. Signed by Judge Paula Xinis on 8/15/2016. (c/m 8/15/16 ca2s, Deputy Clerk)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND

JEROME L. GRIMES

*

Plaintiff,

*
v.

OFFICER FARMER
OFFICER WEILL
OFFICER REED
OFFICER WIEDER

*

Civil Action No. PX-16-2468

*
*
*

Defendants.
*****
MEMORANDUM
The above-captioned complaint was filed on July 1, 2016, together with a motion to
proceed in forma pauperis.

Because plaintiff appears to be indigent, the motion shall be

granted.1
Although a complaint need not contain detailed allegations, the facts alleged must be
enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level and require “more than labels and
conclusions,” as “‘courts are not bound to accept as true a legal conclusion couched as a factual
allegation.’” Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007). The complaint must
contain “enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” Id. at 569. Once a
claim has been stated adequately, it may be supported by showing any set of facts consistent with
the allegations in the complaint. Id. at 547. Further, under Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a), a pleading which
sets forth a claim for relief, whether an original claim, counterclaim, cross-claim, or third-party
claim, shall contain (1) a short and plain statement of the grounds upon which the court's
jurisdiction depends, unless the court already has jurisdiction and the claim needs no new
1

Plaintiff indicates he hails from multiple districts, including Louisiana and Florida.

grounds of jurisdiction to support it, (2) a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the
pleader is entitled to relief, and (3) a demand for judgment for the relief the pleader seeks.
Moreover, each "averment of a pleading shall be simple, concise, and direct." Fed. R. Civ. P.
8(e)(1).

“[T]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere

statements, do not suffice.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009) (citing Twombly, 550
U.S. at 555).
Factors to consider in determining if a complaint fails to comply with Rule 8(a) include:
the length and complexity of the complaint, see, e.g., United States ex rel. Garst v. LockheedMartin Corp., 328 F.3d 374, 378 (7th Cir.2003); whether the complaint was clear enough to
enable the defendant to know how to defend himself, see, e.g., Kittay v. Kornstein, 230 F.3d 531,
541 (2d Cir. 2000); and whether the plaintiff was represented by counsel. See, e.g., Elliott v.
Bronson, 872 F.2d 20, 21-22 (2d Cir. 1989).
The court has thoroughly examined the complaint and finds it is insufficient and fails to
comply with federal pleading requirements. Instead of a concise statement of facts as to the
underlying cause of action, the complaint is replete with legal statements and conclusions.
Portions of the complaint are nonsensical.2

Even after affording the matter a generous

construction the court cannot determine the precise nature and jurisdictional basis of the

2

It would appear that plaintiff is complaining about the legality of a June 1, 2016 traffic
stop, the subsequent search and seizure of the vehicle, and the traffic citations he received in Montgomery
County, Maryland. The state court docket shows that he was cited with a number of traffic citations for
the failure to display his license to uniform police on demand, driving without a required license and
authorization, driving on a revoked out-of-state license, driving while license is suspended, driving on a
suspended out-of-state license, the failure to attach vehicle registration plates at front and rear, the failure
to display registration card upon demand by police, and driving without current registration plates and
validation tabs. State v. Grimes, Citation Nos. 16PODHH, 16QODHH, 16RODHH, 16SODHH,
16TODHH, 16VODHH, 26WODHH, & 16XODHH (District Court For Montgomery County); see
http://casesearch.courts.state.md.us/casesearch/inquirySearch.jis. He seeks an injunction to criminally
prosecute the officers and to enjoin them from “invading [his] privacy.” In addition, he requests an award
of compensatory and punitive damages.

2

complaint and how each named defendant is involved. One can only imagine the difficulties
which would ensue in having defendants attempt to answer the complaint. It is well-settled law
that complaint allegations must “give the defendant fair notice of what the plaintiff's claim is and
the grounds upon which it rests.” Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A., 534 U.S. 506, 512, (2002)
(internal quotation marks omitted).3
For the foregoing reasons the complaint shall be dismissed without prejudice for the
failure to comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a).

Date: August 15, 2016

/S/
PAULA XINIS
United States District Judge

3

A review of the Public Access to Court Electronic Records (“PACER”) docket reveals
that plaintiff has filed over five hundred civil cases in the federal district courts, primarily in the Northern
District of California.

3