United States District Court, D. Nebraska
WILLIAM P. DRUCKLIEB, Plaintiff,
CARA RYAN, Defendant.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Richard G. Kopf Senior United States District Judge
a non-prisoner, has been given leave to proceed in forma
pauperis. (Filing No. 5.) The court now conducts an initial
review of Plaintiff's claims to determine whether summary
dismissal is appropriate under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)
(requiring the court to dismiss actions filed in forma
pauperis if they are frivolous or malicious, fail to state a
claim on which relief may be granted, or seek monetary relief
against a defendant who is immune from such relief).
SUMMARY OF COMPLAINT
only factual allegations refer to Defendant's
“malicious and negligent interference with a publicly
funded education through ongoing harassment, defamation,
false swearing and damages to personal property beginning
April 20, 2018 to present.” (Filing No. 1 at CM/ECF p.
4.) Plaintiff purports to bring an equal protection claim, as
well as claims under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29
U.S.C. § 794, et seq., the Americans with
Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12131, et seq.,
and the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, 42 U.S.C. §
6101, et seq. (prohibiting discrimination on the
basis of age in programs or activities receiving federal
financial assistance). (Id. at p. 3.) Plaintiff
seeks recovery for “losses of tuition, losses of
educational materials, lost educational opportunities and
lost wages . . . in the amount of $1, 000, 000. Unspecified
damages for loss of future wages and punitive damages.”
(Id. at p. 4.)
STANDARDS ON INITIAL REVIEW
court is required to review in forma pauperis complaints to
determine whether summary dismissal is appropriate.
See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). The court must dismiss
a complaint or any portion of it that states a frivolous or
malicious claim, that fails to state a claim upon which
relief may be granted, or that seeks monetary relief from a
defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. §
plaintiffs must set forth enough factual allegations to
“nudge their claims across the line from conceivable
to plausible, ” or “their complaint must be
dismissed.” Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly,
550 U.S. 544, 569-70 (2007); see also Ashcroft v.
Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (“A claim has
facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content
that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that
the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.”).
essential function of a complaint under the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure is to give the opposing party ‘fair
notice of the nature and basis or grounds for a claim, and a
general indication of the type of litigation
involved.'” Topchian v. JPMorgan Chase Bank,
N.A., 760 F.3d 843, 848 (8th Cir. 2014) (quoting
Hopkins v. Saunders, 199 F.3d 968, 973 (8th Cir.
1999)). However, “[a] pro se complaint must be
liberally construed, and pro se litigants are held to a
lesser pleading standard than other parties.”
Topchian, 760 F.3d at 849 (internal quotation marks
and citations omitted).
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). However, as set forth above, even pro se
litigants must comply with the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8 requires that
every complaint contain “a short and plain statement of
the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to
relief” and that “[e]ach allegation . . . be
simple, concise, and direct.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2),
(d)(1). A complaint must state enough to “‘give
the defendant fair notice of what the . . . claim is and the
grounds upon which it rests.'” Erickson v.
Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 93 (2007) (quoting
Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555). Here, Plaintiff's
Complaint fails to meet this minimal pleading standard.
court's own motion, Plaintiff shall have 30 days from the
date of this Memorandum and Order to file an amended
complaint that sufficiently describes his claims against
Defendant. Plaintiff should be mindful to clearly explain
what Defendant did to him, when Defendant did it, and how
Defendant's actions harmed him. If Plaintiff fails
to file an amended complaint in accordance with this
Memorandum and Order, his claims against Defendant will be
dismissed without prejudice and without further notice. The
court reserves the right to conduct further review of
Plaintiff's claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
1915(e)(2) after he addresses the matters set forth in this
Memorandum and Order.
the court's own motion, Plaintiff will have 30 days from
the date of this Memorandum and Order to file an amended
complaint that complies with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
8. Failure to do so will result in dismissal of this matter
without further notice.
clerk's office is directed to set a pro se case
management deadline in this matter: August 12, 2019-deadline