D'Ercole v. Harrahs Hotel Resort et al

Filing 8

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - This action is dismissed without prejudice for the reasons set forth in this order and the order dated December 15, 2014. A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with this order. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(GJG)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
ERIC J. D’ERCOLE,
Plaintiff,
v.
HARRAHS HOTEL RESORT,
DOUG SEXTON, DCI IRGC,
BRIAN EYBERG, OMAHA
POLICE DEPARTMENT,
DOUGLAS COUNTY
CORRECTIONS DEPARTMENT,
and LAURA PETERSEN,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

8:14CV291

MEMORANDUM
AND ORDER

This matter is before the court on its own motion. Plaintiff Eric D’Ercole filed
a Complaint (Filing No. 1) on September 25, 2014, against Harrah’s Hotel in Council
Bluffs, Iowa, the Omaha Police Department, the Douglas County Corrections
Department, and three individuals mentioned only in the caption of the Complaint
(Doug Sexton, Brian Eyberg, and Laura Petersen). Plaintiff alleged in the Complaint
that he contracted food poisoning after eating undercooked chicken at Harrah’s Hotel.
After he complained to the hotel, he “was persecuted as a criminal on court docket
proceedings” and sodomized by a female police officer named Janig. (Filing No. 1
at CM/ECF p. 3.) For relief, he asked for the court to “quash all charges against [him]”
because they are predicated upon a “false arrest.” He also asked the court to award
him monetary damages. (Id. at CM/ECF p. 5.)
The court conducted a pre-service screening of the Complaint on December 15,
2014. The court determined the Complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief
could be granted against any of the named defendants. (Filing No. 6 at CM/ECF p.
3.) The court ordered Plaintiff to file an amended complaint within 30 days. He did
not do so.

Plaintiff filed an item of correspondence (Filing No. 7) addressed to the clerk
of the court on March 2, 2015, in which he complains jail officials in Iowa are
denying him access to medical care. Even if the court were to construe this item of
correspondence as an amended complaint, it was untimely filed, it is entirely unrelated
to the allegations raised in the Complaint, and it offers only factually unsupported and
conclusory allegations.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:
1.
This action is dismissed without prejudice for the reasons set forth in this
order and the order dated December 15, 2014.
2.

A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with this order.

DATED this 20th day of April, 2015.
BY THE COURT:
Richard G. Kopf
Senior United States District Judge

*This opinion may contain hyperlinks to other documents or Web sites. The U.S. District Court for the District
of Nebraska does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they
provide on their Web sites. Likewise, the court has no agreements with any of these third parties or their Web sites. The
court accepts no responsibility for the availability or functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases
to work or directs the user to some other site does not affect the opinion of the court.

2