Demos v. United States et al
Filing
5
MEMORANDUM OPINION re 4 Judgment. Signed by Michael P. Mills on 8/28/12. (cr)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
WESTERN DIVISION
JOHN ROBERT DEMOS, JR.
PLAINTIFFS
v.
No. 3:12CV61-M-S
UNITED STATES,
STATE OF WASHINGTON
DEFENDANT
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the court, sua sponte, for consideration of dismissal. The plaintiff
lists as defendants the United States and the State of Washington. The plaintiff states that he is
entitled to $500,000.00 in damages. He alleges, among other things, that on January 15, 1974,
he was “seized as the prize/booty by pirates aboard an armed privateer cruiser boat. The pirates
were disguised as Department of Corrections officials and State and County Detectives from the
State of Washington.” The other claims in the complaint touch on whether the Holy Bible is the
supreme law of the land.
The court has considered the contents of the pro se complaint and has given it the liberal
construction required by Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519 (1972); however, the complaint makes
no sense. The complaint describes events occurring 38 years ago, and contains no information
about how any of the defendants are connected to whatever the plaintiff those events. Quite
simply, the complaint does not make any sense. Courts have “the unusual power to pierce the
veil of the complaint’s factual allegations and dismiss those claims whose factual contentions are
clearly baseless . . . . Examples . . . are claims describing fantastic or delusional scenarios . . . .”
Id., 490 U.S. at 327, 328. The plaintiff’s allegations unquestionably are examples of “fantastic
or delusional scenarios.” As such, they will be dismissed. A final judgment in accordance with
this opinion will be entered today.
THIS the 28th day of August, 2012.
/s/ MICHAEL P. MILLS
CHIEF JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?