Cruit v. U.S. Government et al

Filing 3

ORDER DISMISSING CASE Pltf's 2 application to proceed without prepayment of fees is GRANTED; and 1 Complaint DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as frivolous and for failure to state claims. Signed by Judge Lacy Thornburg on 2/27/07. (ejb)

Download PDF
Cruit v. U.S. Government et al Doc. 3 Case 1:07-cv-00075-LHT Document 3 Filed 02/28/2007 Page 1 of 3 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA ASHEVILLE DIVISION CIVIL NO. 1:07CV75 RAYMOND LESLIE CRUIT, JR., ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) V s. ) ) THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT,) et al., ) ) Defendants. ) ) ORDER OF DISMISSAL THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Plaintiff's application to proceed without the prepayment of fees and his proposed complaint. The undersigned grants the application but sua sponte dismisses the action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2). Section 1915 provides, in pertinent part, that "[n]otwithstanding any filing fee, or any portion thereof, that may have been paid, the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that . . . the action [ ] is frivolous or malicious [or] fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted . . . ." 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2) (emphasis added). Under this statutory proscription, the district court must dismiss such a case and it is Dockets.Justia.com Case 1:07-cv-00075-LHT Document 3 Filed 02/28/2007 Page 2 of 3 2 the intent of Congress that such dismissals occur prior to service of the complaint on defendants. Cochran v. Morris, 73 F.3d 1310, 1315 (4th Cir. 1996); White v. White, 886 F.2d 721 (4th Cir. 1989). "Legally frivolous claims are based on an `indisputably meritless legal theory' and include `claims of infringement of a legal interest which clearly does not exist." Adams v. Rice, 40 F.3d 72, 75 (4th Cir. 1994). This standard encompasses complaints that are either legally or factually baseless. The statutory language dictates a high degree of deference to the discretion of district courts. A claim can be dismissed whenever a district court is "satisfied" the claim is frivolous. Moreover, the term frivolousness itself contemplates deference because "as a practical matter, it is simply not susceptible to categorical definition." . . . "[D]iscretion granted to district judges to screen out meritless cases," is necessary to prevent the abuse of free court access by litigants who possess both time and dissatisfactions in abundance. Cochran, supra, at 1316 (quoting Adams, supra, at 74, and Nasim v. Warden, Maryland House of Correction, 64 F.3d 951, 953 (4th Cir. 1995)). The Court has reviewed the proposed complaint and finds that it is frivolous and no cause of action has been stated. As a result, the complaint will be dismissed. Case 1:07-cv-00075-LHT Document 3 Filed 02/28/2007 Page 3 of 3 3 IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the Plaintiff's application to proceed without the prepayment of fees is hereby GRANTED; and IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the complaint is hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE as frivolous and for failure to state claims. Signed: February 27, 2007

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?