Manuel v. Jones Manuel
Filing
4
MEMORANDUM AND OPINION granting 2 MOTION/APPLICATION to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, any remaining motions are denied as moot. (Signed by Judge Lee H Rosenthal) Parties notified. (cfelchak, 4)
United States District Court
Southern District of Texas
ENTERED
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTON DIVISION
BRICKEY JUAN MANUEL, SR.,
(TDCJ-CID #02026549)
Plaintiff,
vs.
PAULA KAYE JONES MANUEL,
Defendant.
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
January 26, 2016
David J. Bradley, Clerk
CIVIL ACTION NO. H-16-0080
§
§
§
MEMORANDUM AND OPINION
Brickey Juan Manuel, Sr., an inmate of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice Correctional Institutions Division, sued Paula Kaye Jones Manuel, his wife, in January 2016,
alleging a denial of due process. Manuel is representing himself and proceeding in forma pauperis,
without prepaying the entire filing fee.
Federal courts are authorized to review, before docketing, if feasible, or in any event as soon
as practicable after docketing, a complaint in a civil action in which a prisoner seeks redress from
a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. The
court must dismiss any part ofthe complaint that is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon
which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such
relief. A complaint is frivolous if it lacks an arguable basis in law or fact. See Denton v. Hernandez,
504 U.S. 25, 31 (1992); Richardson v. Spurlock, 260 F.3d 495, 498 (5th Cir. 2001)(citing Siglar v.
Hightower, 112F.3d 191,193 (5thCir.1997)). "Acomplaintlacksanarguablebasisinlawifitis
based on an indisputably meritless legal theory, such as if the complaint alleges the violation of a
legal interest which clearly does not exist." Davis v. Scott, 157 F.3d 1003, 1005 (5th Cir.
1998)(quotingMcCormickv. Stalder, 105 F.3d 1059,1061 (5thCir. 1997)).
P :\CASES\prisoner~habeas\20 16\ 16..0080. a03 .wpd
Manuel states that he and Paula Kaye Jones Manuel were married on September 16, 1992
and separated in 2014. In 2001, Manuel and his wife ran a business called "Angels Express."
Manuel states that because he is unable to file for a divorce, he filed this suit to recover his share of
the community property.
The suit cannot proceed. Manuel has no civil rights claim against his wife, a private person
who does not work for the government. Claims for damages for civil and constitutional rights
violations must proceed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, which requires government or state action. The
conduct of a private person like Manuel's wife is not state action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See
Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 325, 329 (1983).
This court has no jurisdiction over Manuel's suit against Paula Kaye Jones Manuel. The suit
is dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § 19l5A(b)(l). The motion to proceed informapauperis, (Docket
Entry No. 2), is granted, and any remaining motions are denied as moot.
SIGNED on January 25, 2016, at Houston, Texas.
Lee H. Rosenthal
United States District Judge
P :\CASES\prisoner-habeas\20 16\ 16-0080 .a03 .wpd
2
~
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?