Court Opinion

ID: 9387987
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-04-19 16:01:07.527217+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:16.707753
License: Public Domain

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                            FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

SAMSON WOUBETU,                               )
                                              )
               Plaintiff,                     )
                                              )
       v.                                     )         Civil Action No. 23-0949 (UNA)
                                              )
DSK MARIAM ETHIOPIAN                          )
ORTHODOX TEWAHIDO                             )
CHURCH PEOPLE,                                )
                                              )
               Defendant.                     )

                                 MEMORANDUM OPINION

       This matter is before the Court on consideration of plaintiff’s application to proceed in

forma pauperis and pro se complaint. The Court grants the application and, for the reasons

discussed below, the dismisses the complaint.

       A pro se litigant’s pleading is held to less stringent standards than would be applied to a

formal pleading drafted by lawyer. See Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972). Even pro

se litigants, however, must comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Jarrell v. Tisch,

656 F. Supp. 237, 239 (D.D.C. 1987). Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires

that a complaint contain a short and plain statement of the grounds upon which the Court’s

jurisdiction depends, a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled

to relief, and a demand for judgment for the relief the pleader seeks. Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). The

purpose of the minimum standard of Rule 8 is to give fair notice to the defendants of the claim

being asserted, sufficient to prepare a responsive answer, to prepare an adequate defense, and to

determine whether the doctrine of res judicata applies. Brown v. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498

(D.D.C. 1977).

                                                  1
       Generally, plaintiff alleges that the priest and members of his church refuse to give him

money, talk to him, or allow him to eat in the dining room; they also beat him, insult him, and

watch him on camera. Missing from the complaint, however, is a statement establishing a basis

for this Court’s jurisdiction, a statement of claim or a demand for relief. As drafted, the

complaint fails to comply with the minimum pleading standard set forth in Rule 8(a) and,

therefore, must be dismissed. A separate order will issue.

DATE: April 19, 2023                                          /s/
                                                              TANYA S. CHUTKAN
                                                              United States District Judge

                                                 2