United States District Court, District of Columbia
June 22, 2015
PRESTON SCHOFIELD, Plaintiff,
JUDGE JAMES DEKLEVA, et al., Defendants.
COLLEEN KOLLAR-KOTELLY, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on the plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis and his pro se "Affidavit of Public Corruption in Florida, which is construed as a 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).
Generally, plaintiff recounts proceedings brought against him in Florida state courts, alleged wrongful acts of judges, prosecutors, and law enforcement officers, and alleged violations of rights protected by the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh and Eight Amendments to the United States Constitution. The complaint neither contains a short and plain statement showing plaintiff's entitlement to relief nor demands any particular relief. As drafted, the complaint does not comply with Rule 8(a) and it will be dismissed.
An Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is issued separately.