Jack v. World Wrestling Entertainment Inc et al
ORDER signed by Chief Judge William C Griesbach on 12/10/2012 granting 2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis and dismissing this action for lack of jurisdiction. (cc: Brian Patrick Jack via U.S. Mail) (Griesbach, William)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
BRIAN P JACK,
Case No. 12-C-1218
WORLD WRESTLING ENTERTAINMENT et al.,
Plaintiff Brian P. Jack, a resident of Wisconsin proceeding pro se, filed a largely incoherent
complaint seeking damages against an entity named the World Wrestling Federation and others.
Jack has also filed a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Ordinarily, a plaintiff must pay
a statutory filing fee of $350 to bring suit in federal court. 28 U.S.C. § 1914. The federal in forma
pauperis statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1915, however, insures indigent litigants meaningful access to the
federal courts. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 324 (1989). Section 1915 authorizes an indigent
party to commence a federal court action, without costs and fees, upon submission of an affidavit
asserting an inability “to pay such fees or give security therefor” and stating “the nature of the
action, defense or appeal and the affiant’s belief that the person is entitled to redress.” 28 U.S.C.
Recognizing that some nonpaying litigants may attempt to abuse this privilege, however,
Congress also authorized the courts to dismiss such a case if the allegation of poverty is untrue, or
if satisfied that the action (1) is frivolous or malicious, (2) fails to state a claim on which relief may
be granted, or (3) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28
U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). An action is considered frivolous if there is no arguable basis for relief either
in law or fact. Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 325.
Plaintiff has filed the required affidavit of indigence. Review of that affidavit reveals that
Plaintiff is presently unemployed and has approximately $2,000 in expenses. Plaintiff also indicates
that he has substantial student loan and medical debts. Based on Plaintiff’s affidavit of indigence,
the Court is satisfied that he meets the poverty requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 1915.
The Court now turns its attention to the substance of the complaint. Plaintiff’s complaint
presents a confusing hodgepodge of allegations against various defendants. To the extent they are
understandable, the Court is unable to discern a federal claim or any basis for federal jurisdiction.
Although some of the parties named as defendants appear to be citizens of other states, at least one
is not. Absent a claim arising under federal law or complete diversity of citizenship of the parties,
this Court lacks jurisdiction over the subject matter of the lawsuit. In the absence of federal
jurisdiction, the Court has no choice but to dismiss the action. Accordingly, the action is dismissed
for lack of federal jurisdiction.
SO ORDERED this 10th day of December, 2012.
s/ William C. Griesbach
William C. Griesbach, Chief Judge
United States District Court
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?