United States District Court, District of Columbia
February 18, 2015
LISA ALLEY, Plaintiff,
FCC and CCNV/DC KITCHEN/FED EX, Defendants.
TANYA S. CHUTKAN, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis and her pro se civil complaint. The application will be granted, and the complaint will be dismissed.
The Court has reviewed plaintiff's complaint, keeping in mind that complaints filed by pro se litigants are held to less stringent standards than those applied to formal pleadings drafted by lawyers. See Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972). Even pro se litigants, however, must comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Jarrell v. Tisch, 656 F.Supp. 237, 239 (D.D.C. 1987). Rule 8(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires that a complaint contain a short and plain statement of the grounds upon which the Court's jurisdiction depends, a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief, and a demand for judgment for the relief the pleader seeks. Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a). The purpose of the minimum standard of Rule 8 is to give fair notice to the defendants of the claim being asserted, sufficient to prepare a responsive answer, to prepare an adequate defense and to determine whether the doctrine of res judicata applies. Brown v. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977).
The plaintiff is "[r]equesting right to restitution and right to protection from intimidation and harassment, " as well as "an im[m]ediate no contact order from criminal offenders." Compl. at 1. She demands compensation of $73, 000, 000.00. Id. The complaint fails to set forth a basis for this Court's jurisdiction or any factual allegations showing that the plaintiff is entitled to the relief sought. As drafted the complaint fails to comply with Rule 8(a) and it will be dismissed.
An Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is issued separately.