Toodle v. Elizabeth et al

Filing 2

ORDER Granting 1 Application for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. The Clerk of the Court shall file the Complaint. This action is DISMISSED as frivolous. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 4/11/2013. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLR)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

8

***

9

SANDRA B. TOODLE,

Case No. 2:13-cv-00599-MMD-NJK
Plaintiffs,

10

ORDER
11
12
13

v.
QUEEN ELIZABETH, et al.,

(Plf.’s Application to Proceed In Forma
Pauperis – dkt. no. 1)

Defendants.

14
15

Plaintiff Sandra B. Toodle has submitted an Application to Proceed in Forma

16

Pauperis along with a Complaint. (See dkt. no. 1.) The Court finds that Plaintiff is

17

unable to pre-pay the filing fee, and thus grants her Application.

18

The Court has also reviewed the Complaint and finds that this action must be

19

dismissed. Pursuant to the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (“PRLA”), federal courts

20

must dismiss the claim of a plaintiff proceeding in forma pauperis if the action is

21

“frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted, or seeks

22

monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief.”

23

§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(i)-(iii). A complaint is frivolous “where it lacks an arguable basis either in

24

law or in fact . . . . [The] term ‘frivolous,’ when applied to a complaint, embraces not only

25

the inarguable legal conclusion, but also the fanciful factual allegation.” Neitzke v.

26

Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989); see also Cato v. United States, 70 F.3d 1103, 1106

27

(9th Cir. 1995). “[A] finding of factual frivolousness is appropriate when the facts alleged

28

rise to the level of the irrational or the wholly incredible, whether or not there are

28 U.S.C.

1

judicially noticeable facts available to contradict them. An in forma pauperis complaint

2

may not be dismissed, however, simply because the court finds the plaintiff’s allegations

3

unlikely.” Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 33 (1992). Allegations of a pro se

4

complainant are held to less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by

5

lawyers. Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972) (per curiam).

6

Toodle names Queen Elizabeth, Sir Charles, Gwendolyn Johnson, Anita Johnson,

7

and Andrew Johnson as defendants, and claims each violated her Thirteenth

8

Amendment right against involuntary servitude. She alleges that Queen Elizabeth and

9

“U.S. Senator Andrew Johnson” gave Gwendolyn Johnson “benefits and injury money”

10

that was hers, part of which was awarded as recoveries from other lawsuits across the

11

country. Toodle’s Complaint is rife with fanciful and nonsensical allegations, none of

12

which appear to support a Thirteenth Amendment claim.

13

must be dismissed.

14
15

Accordingly, her Complaint

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Toodle’s Application to Proceed in Forma
Pauperis (dkt. no. 1) is GRANTED.

16

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall file the Complaint.

17

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED as frivolous. The

18
19

Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly.
DATED THIS 11th day of April 2013.

20
21
MIRANDA M. DU
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2