Morisse v. Obama
Filing
5
DECISION AND ORDER signed by Judge Lynn Adelman on 12/9/15 that plaintiffs motion to proceed without prepaying the filing fee 2 is GRANTED. Further ordering that the complaint and this action are DISMISSED. The Clerk of Court shall enter final judgment. (cc: via USPS to plaintiff) (dm)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
WILLIAM MORISSE,
Plaintiff,
v.
Case No. 15-C-1427
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA,
Defendant.
DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiff William Morisse, proceeding pro se, has filed a complaint in this court
against Barack Obama, the President of the United States. He seeks leave to proceed
without prepayment of the filing fee, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Having reviewed
Morisse’s declaration of indigence, I conclude that he cannot afford to prepay the filing fee
and will grant his motion to proceed under § 1915.
District courts may screen complaints filed by all litigants, prisoners and nonprisoners, regardless of fee status. Rowe v. Shake, 196 F.3d 778, 783 (7th Cir. 1999).
The district court may screen the complaint prior to service on the defendants, and must
dismiss the complaint if it is legally “frivolous or malicious” or fails to state a claim upon
which relief may be granted. Id.; 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).
Morisse’s complaint is sparse. He alleges as follows: “The president made an
agreement contract and defaulted on it. Tort claim.” Obviously, this does not satisfy
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a), which requires a complaint to contain “a short and
plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” The complaint
does not identify the contract at issue, explain when it was entered into, or identify the
conduct that resulted in the president defaulting. Nor does the complaint identify any facts
that would support a tort claim. Thus, the complaint does not state a claim upon which
relief may be granted. It will be dismissed for that reason.
I have considered whether to grant the plaintiff leave to amend his complaint and
decided that doing so would only invite frivolous litigation. That is because the complaint,
along with other documents the plaintiff has filed, reveal that this suit is based on utterly
fantastic and delusional allegations. See, e.g., Kadamovas v. Stevens, 706 F.3d 843, 845
(7th Cir. 2013) (court may dismiss suit as frivolous when it is based on fantastic
allegations). To begin with, the allegation that the plaintiff has entered into a contract with
the President of the United States is itself incredible. However, there is more. In his
demand for relief, the plaintiff requests that he be given a “new body” and also that he be
taken to Arizona “to build Candelstick Park and Star City.” In other documents, the plaintiff
claims that he is “the one that found the thousand trillion gazillion that was turned into the
President of the United States.” ECF No. 4 at 6. He also claims that he has had sex with
an invisible woman who gave birth to 10,000 children. Id. at 7.
Other delusional
allegations can be found in these documents, including plaintiff’s claim that a hole has
been drilled in his brain and a reader has been implanted in it. Id. at 15. In light of these
allegations, it is clear that granting the plaintiff leave to amend will not result in the filing of
a valid complaint. Accordingly, this suit will be dismissed in its entirety.
For the reasons stated, IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion to proceed without
prepaying the filing fee is GRANTED.
2
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the complaint and this action are DISMISSED.
The Clerk of Court shall enter final judgment.
Dated at Milwaukee, Wisconsin this 9th day of December, 2015.
s/ Lynn Adelman
_____________________________
LYNN ADELMAN
District Judge
3
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?