Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-02171/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-02171-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 160
Nature of Suit: Stockholder's Suits
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question: Breach of Contract

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANDRE SMITH, SR.,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-06-2171 GEB GGH PS

vs.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff has not paid the fee ordinarily required to file an action in this court, and

has filed an incomplete application to proceed without prepayment of fees. See 28 U.S.C.

§§ 1914(a), 1915(a). The application states that plaintiff receives disability or workers

compensation payments but plaintiff has not provided the source and amount received according

to the instructions. Furthermore, plaintiff states that he owns property interest in “land deal of

the Peachtree Estates in Fairfield, Ca.,” but he has not given the stated value of his interest.

Plaintiff will be provided the opportunity to submit either the appropriate affidavit in support of a

request to proceed in forma pauperis or the appropriate filing fee.

Even had plaintiff completed this court’s form application to proceed in forma

pauperis, and demonstrated a proper basis to proceed without prepayment of funds, this court

would not permit the action to proceed upon the filed complaint. 

Case 2:06-cv-02171-GEB-GGH Document 4 Filed 12/15/06 Page 1 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

The federal in forma pauperis statute authorizes federal courts to dismiss a case if

the action is legally “frivolous or malicious,” fails to state a claim upon which relief may be

granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(e)(2). 

A claim is legally frivolous when it lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact. 

Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989); Franklin v. Murphy, 745 F.2d 1221, 1227-28

(9th Cir. 1984). The court may, therefore, dismiss a claim as frivolous where it is based on an

indisputably meritless legal theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless. Neitzke,

490 U.S. at 327. 

A complaint, or portion thereof, should only be dismissed for failure to state a

claim upon which relief may be granted if it appears beyond doubt that plaintiff can prove no set

of facts in support of the claim or claims that would entitle him to relief. Hishon v. King &

Spalding, 467 U.S. 69, 73 (1984) (citing Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-46 (1957)); Palmer

v. Roosevelt Lake Log Owners Ass’n, 651 F.2d 1289, 1294 (9th Cir. 1981). In reviewing a

complaint under this standard, the court must accept as true the allegations of the complaint in

question, Hospital Bldg. Co. v. Rex Hosp. Trustees, 425 U.S. 738, 740 (1976), construe the

pleading in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, and resolve all doubts in the plaintiff’s favor,

Jenkins v. McKeithen, 395 U.S. 411, 421 (1969). 

The court finds the allegations in plaintiff’s complaint so vague and conclusory

that it is unable to determine whether the current action is frivolous or fails to state a claim for

relief. The court has determined that the complaint does not contain a short and plain statement

as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). Although the Federal Rules adopt a flexible pleading

policy, a complaint must give fair notice and state the elements of the claim plainly and

succinctly. Jones v. Community Redev. Agency, 733 F.2d 646, 649 (9th Cir. 1984). Plaintiff

must allege with at least some degree of particularity overt acts which defendants engaged in that

support plaintiff's claim. Id. If plaintiff does not comply with the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P.

Case 2:06-cv-02171-GEB-GGH Document 4 Filed 12/15/06 Page 2 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

3

8(a)(2) and amend his complaint when he submits his completed in forma pauperis application, it

will be dismissed with leave to amend. 

Plaintiff is warned that the amended complaint must be complete without

reference to exhibits, and must state the relief sought. Plaintiff has failed to properly and fully

set forth his allegations within the complaint, instead attaching 231 pages of exhibits which

plaintiff mistakenly believes are sufficient to state a claim. It is not the function of the court to

peruse exhibits and frame plaintiff’s cause of action for him, nor would it be proper to do so.

If plaintiff chooses to amend the complaint, plaintiff must set forth the

jurisdictional grounds upon which the court’s jurisdiction depends. Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). Further,

plaintiff must demonstrate how the conduct complained of has resulted in a deprivation of

plaintiff’s federal rights. See Ellis v. Cassidy, 625 F.2d 227 (9th Cir. 1980). 

In addition, plaintiff is informed that the court cannot refer to a prior pleading in

order to make plaintiff’s amended complaint complete. Local Rule 15-220 requires that an

amended complaint be complete in itself without reference to any prior pleading. This is

because, as a general rule, an amended complaint supersedes the original complaint. See Loux v.

Rhay, 375 F.2d 55, 57 (9th Cir. 1967). Once plaintiff files an amended complaint, the original

pleading no longer serves any function in the case. Therefore, in an amended complaint, as in an

original complaint, each claim and the involvement of each defendant must be sufficiently

alleged. 

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff shall submit, within thirty days from the date of this order, either a

completed application and affidavit in support of his request to proceed in forma pauperis on the

form provided by the Clerk of Court, or the appropriate filing fee; plaintiff's failure to comply

with this order will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. 

2. The complaint is dismissed, with leave to file an amended complaint within

thirty days of this order. PLAINTIFF IS ADVISED THAT ANY FUTURE FILINGS SHOULD

Case 2:06-cv-02171-GEB-GGH Document 4 Filed 12/15/06 Page 3 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

4

REFER TO THE CIVIL CASE NUMBER STAMPED ON PAGE ONE OF THIS ORDER.

3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send plaintiff a new Application to

Proceed In Forma Pauperis.

DATED: 12/15/06

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows

 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

GGH:076 - Smith2171.frv.wpd

Case 2:06-cv-02171-GEB-GGH Document 4 Filed 12/15/06 Page 4 of 4