Betancourt et al v. Kings Harbor Multicare Center et al

Filing 3

OPINION & ORDER denying 1 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. The complaint is hereby DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Plaintiffs Motion to Proceed in Forma Pauperis is DENIED and he is ORDERED to pay all costs associated with this action. Signed by Judge Salvador E Casellas on 9/17/2009. (THD) Modified to add the word "OPINION" and the document type on 9/21/2009 (su).

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT F O R THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO J O S E M. BETANCOURT, P la in tif f v. C IV IL NO. 09-1932 (SEC) K IN G S HARBOR MULTICARE CENTER, e t al., D e f e n d a n ts

O P I N I O N AND ORDER

B e f o re this Court is a motion (Docket # 1) filed by Plaintiff, Jose M. Betancourt (h e re in a f te r "Plaintiff"), praying to proceed in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. S e c tio n 1915(a). The motion is accompanied by the instant Complaint (Docket # No. 2), dated S e p te m b e r 16, 2009. For the reasons set forth below, Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma p a u p e r is shall be DENIED, and the present action will be DISMISSED WITHOUT P R E JU D IC E . The pleadings made in this case suggest that it is an action against a nursing home f a c ility in Bronx, New York . See Docket # 2. Plaintiff brings the present action for breach of c o n tra c t, breach of fiduciary duty, larceny, fraud, negligence, medical malpractice, legal m a lp ra c tic e , and civil rights violations. As no allegations have been made regarding acts o c c u rrin g in the District of Puerto Rico, and the Defendant in this case is an entity based out o f the State of New York, the proper venue for the case appears to be the United States District C o u rt for the Southern District of New York. See 28 U.S.C. Section 1391(b). Therefore, this

CIVIL NO. 09-1932

-2-

C o u rt has the jurisdiction to dismiss this case without prejudice on venue grounds. 28 U.S.C. S e c tio n 1406(a). However, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) allows for a case litigated in forma pauperis to be d is m is s e d at any time "if satisfied that it is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim upon w h ic h relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from s u c h relief." Accordingly, there is basis for dismissal if the claim proffers an indisputably m e ritle s s legal theory that lacks a basis in the law. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 327 (1 9 8 9 ). This Court understands that the present action presents incomprehensible and frivolous a lle g a tio n s . As listed above, Plaintiff makes a host of unrelated claims against Defendant ranging from larceny, to breach of fiduciary duty, to medical malpractice. Furthermore, the C o m p la in t contains only legal conclusions and citations of federal law, entirely lacking factual a lle g a tio n s . Under Ashcroft v. Iqbal, --- U.S. ---, 129 S.Ct. 1937 (2009), such complaint cannot p ro c e e d in federal court. This court also notes that Plaintiff has filled a number of similar la w su its in this district since 2006, nearly all of which have been dismissed as frivolous. See, e .g ., Betancourt v. Calderoni, 06 cv. 1903 (D.P.R. Nov. 11, 2007); Betancourt v. Sepulveda, 07 c v . 1850 (D.P.R. Nov. 11, 2007); Betancourt v. Vigoritto, 07 cv. 1851 (D.P.R. Dec. 11, 2007); B e ta n c o u rt v. Calderon, 07 cv. 1852 (D.P.R. Apr. 18, 2008). As is the case in the present action, P la in tif f has consistently brought similar claims in his individual capacity and as next of kin and b e n e f ic ia ry of Manuel Betancour. In Betancourt v. Vigoritto Plaintiff brought similar frivolous claims against Defendant, which w e re also dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). This appears to be a hobby for Plaintiff, but his actions have caused considerable loss of time and effort for this district. Passing this case on to

CIVIL NO. 09-1932

-3-

th e Southern District of New York would be a disfavor to the justice system. Accordingly, after an examination of the Compliant (Docket # 2), and the applicable legal s ta n d a rd s , this Court holds that Plaintiff's complaint is frivolous under the standard set forth a b o v e , and filed in an improper venue. The complaint is hereby DISMISSED WITHOUT P R E J U D I C E . Plaintiff's Motion to Proceed in Forma Pauperis is DENIED and he is

O R D E R E D to pay all costs associated with this action. Judgment shall be entered accordingly. S O ORDERED. In San Juan, Puerto Rico, this 17th day of September, 2009.

S /S a lv a d o r E. Casellas SALVADOR E. CASELLAS U .S . SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE