Williams v. Kassebaum
Filing
4
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER. (See Full Order.) IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis [ECF No. 2 ] is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiffs motion for appointment of counsel [ECF No. 3 ] is DENIED as moo t. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall not issue process or cause process to issue upon the complaint, because it is legally frivolous and fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). A separate Order of Dismissal shall accompany this Memorandum and Order. Signed by District Judge E. Richard Webber on 01/22/2015. (CBL)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
TROY WILLIAMS,
Plaintiff,
v.
NANCY KASSEBAUM,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No. 4:14CV02045 ERW
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the application of Troy Williams for leave
to commence this action without prepayment of the filing fee pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915.
Upon consideration of the financial information provided with the
application, the Court finds that plaintiff is financially unable to pay any portion of
the filing fee, and therefore, plaintiff will be granted in forma pauperis status. For
the reasons stated below, the Court will dismiss this action under 28 U.S.C. § 1915.
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), the Court must dismiss a complaint
filed in forma pauperis if the action is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim
upon which relief can be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is
immune from such relief. An action is frivolous if it "lacks an arguable basis in
either law or fact." Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 328 (1989). An action is
malicious if it is undertaken for the purpose of harassing the named defendants and
not for the purpose of vindicating a cognizable right. Spencer v. Rhodes, 656 F.
Supp. 458, 461-63 (E.D.N.C. 1987), aff'd 826 F.2d 1059 (4th Cir. 1987).
An
action fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted if it does not plead
“enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” Bell Atlantic
Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544,570 (2007).
To determine whether an action fails to state a claim upon which relief can
be granted, the Court must engage in a two-step inquiry. First, the Court must
identify the allegations in the complaint that are not entitled to the assumption of
truth. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 1950-51 (2009). These include "legal
conclusions" and "[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action [that
are] supported by mere conclusory statements." Id. at 1949. Second, the Court
must determine whether the complaint states a plausible claim for relief. Id. at
1950-51. This is a "context-specific task that requires the reviewing court to draw
on its judicial experience and common sense." Id. at 1950. The plaintiff is
required to plead facts that show more than the "mere possibility of misconduct."
Id. The Court must review the factual allegations in the complaint "to determine if
they plausibly suggest an entitlement to relief." Id. at 1951. When faced with
2
alternative explanations for the alleged misconduct, the Court may exercise its
judgment in determining whether plaintiff's conclusion is the most plausible or
whether it is more likely that no misconduct occurred. Id. at 1950, 51-52.
In reviewing a pro se complaint under § 1915(e)(2)(B), the Court must give
the complaint the benefit of a liberal construction. Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519,
520 (1972). The Court must also weigh all factual allegations in favor of the
plaintiff, unless the facts alleged are clearly baseless. Denton v. Hernandez, 504
U.S. 25, 32-33 (1992).
The Complaint
Plaintiff, a resident at the Northwest Missouri Psychiatric Rehabilitation
Center, brings this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action Nancy Kassebaum (a former senator
for the State of Kansas).
Plaintiff alleges that, when he resided at the Farmington State Hospital in
1995, he wrote to defendant Kassebaum about his idea to cure numerous diseases.
Plaintiff states that he sent defendant his “foot spray formula.” Plaintiff states that
he needs an attorney to contact Nancy Kassebaum.
Although a pro se complaint is to be liberally construed, the complaint must
contain a short and plain summary of facts sufficient to give fair notice of the claim
asserted. Means v. Wilson, 522 F.2d 833, 840 (8th Cir. 1975). The Court will not
3
supply additional facts or construct a legal theory for plaintiff that assumes facts
that have not been pleaded. Having carefully reviewed the complaint, the Court
concludes that plaintiff’s factual allegations are delusional and fail to state a claim
or cause of action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 or Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents
of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971).
For these reasons, the
complaint will be dismissed, without prejudice.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma
pauperis [ECF No. 2] is GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion for appointment of
counsel [ECF No. 3] is DENIED as moot.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall not issue process or
cause process to issue upon the complaint, because it is legally frivolous and fails
to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).
A separate Order of Dismissal shall accompany this Memorandum and
Order.
So Ordered this 22nd day of January, 2015.
________________________________________
E. RICHARD WEBBER
SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
4
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?