Smith v. Stoddard County

Filing 5

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER re: 4 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis under 42:1983 (prisoner) filed by Plaintiff Kenneth L. Smith, Jr, motion is GRANTED. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis [ECF No. 2] is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED without prejudice. An Order of Dismissal will be filed separately. Signed by District Judge Stephen N. Limbaugh, Jr on 3/4/16. (CSG)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
SOUTHEASTERN DIVISION
KENNETH L. SMITH, JR.,
Plaintiff,
v.
STODDARD COUNTY,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 1:16CV20 SNLJ

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis in this civil action under 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983. The motion is granted. Additionally, this action is dismissed as frivolous.
Standard of Review
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), the Court is required to dismiss a complaint filed in forma
pauperis if it is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
To state a claim for relief under § 1983, a complaint must plead more than “legal conclusions”
and “[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action [that are] supported by mere
conclusory statements.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009).

A plaintiff must

demonstrate a plausible claim for relief, which is more than a “mere possibility of misconduct.”
Id. at 679. “A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows
the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct
alleged.” Id. at 678. Determining whether a complaint states a plausible claim for relief [is] a
context-specific task that requires the reviewing court to draw on its judicial experience and
common sense. Id. at 679.

The Complaint
Plaintiff has been charged with felony forgery for allegedly attempting to transfer the
ownership of a vehicle he stole. Missouri v. Smith, No. 15SD-CR01027-01 (Stoddard County).
Plaintiff’s only allegations are that Stoddard County held him on a cash-only bond and that he
wants to go home to his family that live in another country. Plaintiff says he is out on bond now
and is not allowed to leave the State of Missouri.
Discussion
To state a claim against a municipality a plaintiff must allege that a policy or custom of
the government entity is responsible for a deprivation of his constitutional rights. Monell v.
Dep’t of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658, 690-91 (1978). Plaintiff has not shown or alleged that a
policy of Stoddard County caused him an actionable harm.

As a result, the complaint is

frivolous.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis [ECF
No. 2] is GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED without prejudice.
An Order of Dismissal will be filed separately.
Dated this 4th day of March, 2016.

STEPHEN N. LIMBAUGH, JR.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2