Source: http://ks.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.20150424_0000405.DKS.htm/qx
Timestamp: 2017-01-17 02:42:33
Document Index: 37699393

Matched Legal Cases: ['§1915', '§1915', '§ 1915', '§ 1915', '§ 1915', '§1915']

| Jenkins v. Sedgwick County
Jenkins v. Sedgwick County
ANTHONY RAY JENKINS, Plaintiff,v.SEDGWICK COUNTY, KANSAS, et al., Defendants.
In conjunction with his federal court Complaint alleging violations of his civil rights stemming from an arrest (Doc. 1), Plaintiff Anthony Ray Jenkins has filed a Motion to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees ( IFP Application, Doc. 3, sealed), with an accompanying Affidavit of Financial Status (Doc. 3-1, sealed). Having reviewed Plaintiff's motion, as well as his financial affidavit and Complaint, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff's motion, but RECOMMENDS that the District Court DISMISS Plaintiff's claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1915(e)(2) for failure to state a claim for which relieve may be granted.
In his supporting financial affidavit, Plaintiff indicates he is 59 years old and single with no dependents. (Doc. 3-1, sealed, at 1-2.) He is currently unemployed and lists no employment history. ( Id., at 2-3.) He indicates he does not own real property, but lists one modest automobile that he owns outright. ( Id., at 3-4.) He lists no government benefits or any type of income other than potential food assistance. ( Id., at 4-5.) He lists no cash on hand. (Id. ) He has filed for bankruptcy. ( Id., at 6.)j He lists no living expenses (not even rent) other than electric and water.
Considering all of the information contained in the financial affidavit, Plaintiff has virtually no income. The Court finds Plaintiff has established that he is entitled to file this action without payment of fees and costs. The Court GRANTS Plaintiff leave to proceed in forma pauperis and directs that this case be filed without payment of a filing fee.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1915(e)(2), a court "shall dismiss" an in forma pauperis case "at any time if the court determines that... the action or appeal - (i) is frivolous or malicious; (ii) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or (iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief." "When a plaintiff is proceeding in forma pauperis, a court has a duty to review the complaint to ensure a proper balance between these competing interests." Mitchell v. Deseret Health Care Facility, No. 13-1360-RDR-KGG, 2013 WL 5797609, at *1 (D. Kan. Sept. 30, 2013).[1] The purpose of § 1915(e) is "the prevention of abusive or capricious litigation." Harris v. Campbell, 804 F.Supp. 153, 155 (D.Kan. 1992) (internal citation omitted) (discussing similar language contained in § 1915(d), prior to the 1996 amendment). Sua sponte dismissal under § 1915 is proper when the complaint clearly appears frivolous or malicious on its face. Hall v. Bellmon, 935 F.2d 1106, 1108 (10th Cir. 1991).
Plaintiff alleges that Defendants violated his civil rights in regard to an arrest that occurred in 2010. ( See generally Doc. 1.) His prayer for relief requests that the warrant arrest in question be "recalled" and his "right to bare arms [be] restored." ( Id., at 6.) He also requests "a farm, 40 acres and a mule, tractor with a house" along with other financial and punitive damages. (Id. )
Simply stated, the Court cannot glean a comprehensible cause of action upon which relief may be granted from the facts alleged in Plaintiff's form Complaint. Further, even assuming Plaintiff had alleged an otherwise viable cause of action, any such claims would be barred by the applicable statute of limitations as the events alleged occurred four to five years ago. Based on the information presented in his Complaint, Plaintiff has not plead a viable federal court cause of action.
The Court finds that Plaintiff has failed to state a claim on which relief may be granted, requiring a recommendation to the District Court of Plaintiff's claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1915(e)(2). This Court RECOMMENDS to the District Court that the case be DISMISSED.