Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-3_10-cv-08109/USCOURTS-azd-3_10-cv-08109-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 360
Nature of Suit: Other Personal Injury
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question: Personal Injury

---

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

27

28

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Bartlett Elliot, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Robert J. Eustace and Annette M. Eustace,

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 10-8109-PCT-MHM

ORDER

Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis

(Doc. # 4). The Court has screened Plaintiff’s Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)

and will dismiss it for failure to state a claim. “[S]ection 1915(e) not only permits but

requires a district court to dismiss an in forma pauperis complaint that fails to state a claim.”

Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1127 (9th Cir. 2000). 

Rule 8(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires that:

A pleading which sets forth a claim for relief, whether an original

claim, counter-claim, cross-claim, or third-party claim, shall contain (1) a short

and plain statement of the grounds upon which the court's jurisdiction depends,

unless the court already has jurisdiction and the claim needs no new grounds

of jurisdiction to support it, (2) a short and plain statement of the claim

showing that the pleader is entitled to relief, and (3) a demand for judgment for

the relief the pleader seeks. Relief in the alternative or of several different

types may be demanded.

Case 3:10-cv-08109-MHM Document 5 Filed 07/21/10 Page 1 of 2
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

27

28

- 2 -

Here, among other defects, Plaintiff's complaint fails to allege an appropriate basis for

federal subject matter jurisdiction: the denial of the “pursuit of happiness” under the

Declaration of Independence is not a sufficient basis to invoke the jurisdiction of the Court.

The Court will give Plaintiff one opportunity to amend the complaint. Plaintiff must:

make clear his allegations in short, plain statements with each claim for relief

identified in separate sections. In the amended complaint, [Plaintiff] must

write out the rights he believes were violated, the name of the person who

violated the right, exactly what that individual did or failed to do, how the

action or inaction of that person is connected to the violation of [Plaintiff's]

rights, and what specific injury [Plaintiff] suffered because of the other

person's conduct. See Rizzo v. Goode, 423 U.S. 362, 371-72, 377 (1976).

Each claim of an alleged violation must be set forth in a separate count. Any

amended complaint filed by [Plaintiff] must conform to the requirements of

Rules 8(a) and (e)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Kennedy v. Andrews, 2005 WL 3358205, *3 (D. Ariz. 2005).

 Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED dismissing Plaintiff’s complaint for failure to comply with Federal

Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a). (Doc. #1)

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying as moot Plaintiff's Motion to Proceed in

Forma Pauperis. (Doc. # 4)

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff may file an Amended Complaint in

compliance with Rule 8(a) no later than 30 days from the date of this order. Plaintiff may

file another Motion to Proceed in Forma Pauperis at that time if he desires. If no Amended

Complaint is filed, this case will be dismissed without further notice.

DATED this 18th day of July, 2010.

Case 3:10-cv-08109-MHM Document 5 Filed 07/21/10 Page 2 of 2