Smith, Kvon v. WI Government Accountability Board et al

Filing 6

ORDER dismissing this case with prejudice. The clerk of court is directed to enter judgment for defendants and close this case. Signed by District Judge Barbara B. Crabb on 1/28/2013. (jef),(ps)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - KVON ROYALE SMITH,
Plaintiff,

ORDER

v.
12-cv-945-bbc
WI GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY
BOARD, DANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE,
DON NEVIASER and
WISCONSIN BADGERS FOOTBALL,
Defendants.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Plaintiff Kvon Royale Smith has submitted a complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The
court has already concluded that plaintiff may proceed in forma pauperis without prepaying
any of the $350 filing fee. The next step in the case is to screen the complaint under 28
U.S.C. § 1915 to determine whether any portion is legally frivolous, malicious, fails to state
a claim upon which relief may be granted or asks for money damages from a defendant who
by law cannot be sued for money damages. Plaintiff is a pro se litigant, which means that
his complaint will be construed liberally as it is reviewed for these potential defects. Haines
v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 521 (1972). After examining plaintiff's complaint, I conclude that
it must be dismissed as frivolous.
Plaintiff names seemingly disparate parties as defendants: the Wisconsin Government
Accountability Board, the Dane County Sheriff’s Office, Don Neviaser and the Wisconsin

1

Badgers football program. He fails to provide any specific allegations about what these
parties have done to him to violate his rights, stating only the following: “Conspiracy to
commit bankruptcy, violation of Privacy Act 1974, violation of Civil Rights Act 1964, Police
reports 15 Dec. 12.” In his request for relief, plaintiff states “I want my money 989 billiontrillion. Equitable distribution. I believe in retribution, all involved deserve to be indicted,
also my motion for discovery.”
Usually when the court receives a complaint so lacking in factual allegations, the
plaintiff would be given a chance to submit an amended complaint explaining his claims
more fully. However, plaintiff’s current filing is so fantastical, appearing to allege a
conspiracy against actors that cannot possibly be related, that it can be safely dismissed as
frivolous without further supplementation by plaintiff. See, e.g., Denton v. Hernandez, 504
U.S. 25, 32-33 (1992) (complaint lacks arguable basis in fact when plaintiff’s allegations
“rise to the level of the irrational or the wholly incredible.”); Edwards v. Snyder, 478 F.3d
827, 829 (7th Cir. 2007) (complaint “is factually frivolous if its allegations are bizarre,
irrational or incredible.”)

2

ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that the case is DISMISSED with prejudice. The clerk of court is
directed to enter judgment for defendants and close this case.
Entered this 24th day of January, 2013.
BY THE COURT:
/s/
BARBARA B. CRABB
District Judge

3