Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-06241/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-06241-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Leland Draper
Plaintiff
Fresno Police Department
Defendant
University Medical Center
Defendant

Document Text:

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LELAND DRAPER, ) 

 )

Plaintiff, )

)

)

v. )

)

FRESNO POLICE DEPARTMENT, )

at al., ) 

 )

Defendants. )

)

 )

1:04-cv-6241-AWI-SMS 

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S

APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN FORMA

PAUPERIS (DOC. 2)

ORDER DISMISSING PLAINTIFF’S

COMPLAINT WITH LEAVE TO FILE AN

AMENDED COMPLAINT NO LATER THAN

THIRTY DAYS AFTER THE DATE OF

SERVICE OF THIS ORDER (DOC. 1)

Plaintiff is a state prisoner housed at the Fresno County

Jail who is proceeding pro se with an action for damages and

other relief concerning alleged civil rights violations. The

matter has been referred to the Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Rules 72-302 and 72-304. 

Due to a clerical error, a delay occurred in processing

Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis and in

screening his complaint, which was filed on August 30, 2004.

I. Application to Proceed in Forma Pauperis

On September 2, 2004, Plaintiff filed an application to

proceed in forma pauperis. 

Case 1:04-cv-06241-AWI -SMS Document 4 Filed 09/15/06 Page 1 of 8
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

 The filing fee for civil actions was $150.00 at the time 1

Plaintiff filed his complaint. 28 U.S.C. § 1914, as amended

effective October 19, 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-317, 110 Stat. 3853

(1996). 

2

Plaintiff has submitted a declaration that makes the showing

required by § 1915(a). Accordingly, the request to proceed in

forma pauperis will be granted. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a).

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1), Plaintiff is required to

pay the statutory filing fee of $150.00 for this action. No 1

initial partial filing will be assessed by this order. 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(b)(1). By separate order, the Court will direct the

appropriate agency to collect monthly payments of twenty percent

of the preceding month’s income credited to Plaintiff’s prison

trust account. These payments will be forwarded by the

appropriate agency to the Clerk of the Court each time the amount

in Plaintiff’s account exceeds $10.00, until the filing fee is

paid in full. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2).

II. Screening the Complaint 

A. Legal Standards

The Court must screen complaints brought by prisoners

seeking relief against a governmental entity or officer. 28

U.S.C. § 1915A(a). The Court must dismiss a complaint or portion

thereof if the Court determines that an allegation of poverty is

untrue or that the action is 1) frivolous or malicious, 2) fails

to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or 3) seeks

monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief.

28 U.S.C. §§ 1915A(b), 1915(e)(2).

 In reviewing a complaint under this standard, the Court

Case 1:04-cv-06241-AWI -SMS Document 4 Filed 09/15/06 Page 2 of 8
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

3

must accept as true the allegations of the complaint in question,

Hospital Bldg. Co. v. Trustees of Rex Hospital, 425 U.S. 738, 740

(1976), construe the pro se pleadings liberally in the light most

favorable to the Plaintiff, Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447

(9 Cir. 2000), and resolve all doubts in the Plaintiff’s favor, th

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

If the Court determines that the complaint fails to state a

claim, leave to amend should be granted to the extent that the

deficiencies of the complaint can be cured by amendment. Lopez v.

Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1130 (9 Cir. 2000) (en banc). A th

complaint, or a portion thereof, should only be dismissed for

failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted if it

appears beyond doubt that the Plaintiff can prove no set of

facts, consistent with the allegations, in support of the claim

or claims that would entitle him to relief. See Hishon v. King &

Spalding, 467 U.S. 69, 73 (1984), citing Conley v. Gibson, 355

U.S. 41, 45-46 (1957); see also Palmer v. Roosevelt Lake Log

Owners’ Ass’n., Inc., 651 F.2d 1289, 1294 (9 Cir. 1981). th

Dismissal of a pro se complaint for failure to state a claim is

proper only where it is obvious that the Plaintiff cannot prevail

on the facts that he has alleged and that an opportunity to amend

would be futile. Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d at 1128.

A claim is frivolous if it lacks an arguable basis either in

law or fact. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 324 (1989). A

frivolous claim is based on an inarguable legal conclusion or a

fanciful factual allegation. Id. A federal court may dismiss a

claim as frivolous if it is based on an indisputably meritless

legal theory or if the factual contentions are clearly baseless.

Case 1:04-cv-06241-AWI -SMS Document 4 Filed 09/15/06 Page 3 of 8
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

4

Id. 

The test for malice is a subjective one that requires the

Court to determine whether the applicant is proceeding in good

faith. Kinney v. Plymouth Rock Squab. Co., 236 U.S. 43, 46

(1915); see Wright v. Newsome, 795 F.2d 964, 968 n. 1 (11 Cir. th

1986). A lack of good faith is most commonly found in repetitive

suits filed by plaintiffs who have used the advantage of costfree filing to file a multiplicity of suits. A complaint may be

inferred to be malicious if it suggests an intent to vex the

defendants or abuse the judicial process by relitigating claims

decided in prior cases, Crisafi v. Holland, 655 F.2d 1305, 1309

(D.C.Cir. 1981); if it threatens violence or contains

disrespectful references to the Court, id.; or if it contains

untrue material allegations of fact or false statements made with

knowledge and an intent to deceive the Court, Horsey v. Asher,

741 F.2d 209, 212 (8 Cir. 1984). th

B. Plaintiff’s Complaint

Plaintiff sues the Fresno Police Department and University

Medical Center. The only facts stated in the complaint regarding

the grounds for relief are that Plaintiff is looking for some

kind of currency relief for all the pain and suffering he and his

family have gone through. (Cmplt. p. 3.) With respect to

exhaustion of administrative remedies, Plaintiff states that he

has not appealed the facts because “they” (apparently his

custodians at the Fresno County Jail) claim that they are the

sheriff and have nothing to do with the police department. Thus,

it appears that Plaintiff’s complaint does not concern his

conditions of confinement at the jail.

Case 1:04-cv-06241-AWI -SMS Document 4 Filed 09/15/06 Page 4 of 8
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

5

The Court finds Plaintiff’s allegations to be so vague and

confusing 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 Federal Rule of Civil

Procedure 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.

In this instance, the Court finds that Plaintiff’s allegations

are not sufficient to put any defendant on notice as to what

actions violated Plaintiff’s rights in any respect.

Further, Plaintiff has not stated facts that indicate a

basis for a conclusion that this Court has subject matter

jurisdiction over this action. 

Plaintiff IS INFORMED that the Civil Rights Act under which

this action was filed provides:

Every person who, under color of [state law]...

subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the

United States... to the deprivation of any rights,

privileges, or immunities secured by the

Constitution... shall be liable to the party injured in

an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper

proceeding for redress. 

42 U.S.C. § 1983. To state a claim pursuant to § 1983, a

plaintiff must plead that defendants acted under color of state

law at the time the act complained of was committed and that the

defendants deprived the plaintiff of rights, privileges, or

immunities secured by the Constitution or laws of the United

Case 1:04-cv-06241-AWI -SMS Document 4 Filed 09/15/06 Page 5 of 8
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

6

States. Gibson v. United States, 781 F.2d 1334, 1338 (9 Cir. th

1986). Plaintiff has not identified any individual defendant or

any conduct on the part of any such defendant that provides a

basis for a claim for relief.

III. Amendment of the Complaint

In summary, the Court finds it necessary to dismiss the

complaint in its entirety. Plaintiff has failed to state a

cognizable claim against any defendant and has failed to plead

facts demonstrating jurisdiction in this Court. However, it is

possible that Plaintiff can allege a set of facts, consistent

with the allegations, in support of the claim or claims that

would entitle him to relief. Thus, the Court will grant Plaintiff

an opportunity to amend the complaint to cure the deficiencies of

this complaint. Plaintiff is informed that a failure to cure the

deficiencies by submitting an amended complaint will result in

dismissal of this action without leave to amend and with

prejudice for failure to state a claim, failure to prosecute, and

failure to comply with an order of the Court. 

A complaint must 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 the defendants engaged in that

support Plaintiff's claim. Id. 

In addition, Plaintiff is informed that the court cannot

refer to a prior pleading in order to make Plaintiff's amended

Case 1:04-cv-06241-AWI -SMS Document 4 Filed 09/15/06 Page 6 of 8
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

7

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's request for leave to proceed in forma

pauperis IS GRANTED; and

2. Plaintiff IS OBLIGATED to pay the statutory filing

fee of $150.00 for this action; Plaintiff is not assessed an

initial partial filing fee; all fees shall be collected and paid

in accordance with this Court’s order to the Fresno County Jail

or its designee filed concurrently herewith; and

3. Plaintiff's complaint IS DISMISSED; and

4. Plaintiff IS GRANTED thirty days from the date of

service of this order to file an amended complaint that complies

with the requirements of the pertinent substantive law, the

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and the Local Rules of

Practice; the amended complaint must bear the docket number

assigned this case and must be labeled "First Amended Complaint"; 

failure to file an amended complaint in accordance with this

order will be considered to be a failure to comply with

an order of the Court pursuant to Local Rule 11-110 and will

Case 1:04-cv-06241-AWI -SMS Document 4 Filed 09/15/06 Page 7 of 8
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

8

result in dismissal of this action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 15, 2006 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-06241-AWI -SMS Document 4 Filed 09/15/06 Page 8 of 8