Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Prigge v. Romney

United States District Court, D. Utah

January 29, 2018

DIANNE R. PRIGGE, Plaintiff,
v.
JUDGE V. ROMNEY et al., Defendants

          ORDER TO CURE DEFICIENT COMPLAINT & MEMORANDUM DECISION

          DAVID NUFFER, CHIEF JUDGE

         Plaintiff, inmate Dianne R. Prigge, filed this pro se civil rights suit, see 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 (2018), in forma pauperis, see 28 Id. § 1915. The Court now screens the Complaint and orders Plaintiff to file an amended complaint to cure deficiencies before further pursuing claims.

         A. Deficiencies in Complaint

         Complaint:

         (a) is not on the form required by the Court.

         (b) does not set forth in clear, concise, and well-organized fashion elements of causes of action sought to be pursued by Plaintiff.

         (c) fails to provide an affirmative link between specific defendants and specific civil-rights vio lat ions.

         (d) improperly names judges as defendants, without considering judicial immunity, as further explained below.

         (e) improperly names public defender(s) as defendant(s), without considering that public defenders are not considered to be state actors subject to suit under § 1983.

         (f) possibly attempts to state claims of inadequate medical treatment by corrections personnel but neither provides necessary factual details nor links of possible claims to specific defendants.

         (g) is perhaps supplemented with claims from letters and documents filed since the Complaint, which claims should be included in an amended complaint, if filed, and will not be treated further by the Court unless properly included.

         B. Instructions to Plaintiff

         Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires a complaint to contain "(1) a short and plain statement of the grounds for the court's jurisdiction . . .; (2) a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief; and (3) a demand for the relief sought." Rule 8's requirements mean to guarantee "that defendants enjoy fair notice of what the claims against them are and the grounds upon which they rest." TV Commc'ns Network, Inc. v ESPN, Inc., 767 F.Supp. 1062, 1069 (D. Colo. 1991).

         Pro se litigants are not excused from complying with these minimal pleading demands. "This is so because a pro se plaintiff requires no special legal training to recount the facts surrounding his alleged injury, and he must provide such facts if the court is to determine whether he makes out a claim on which relief can be granted." Hall v. Bellmon, 935 F.2d 1106, 1110 (10th Cir. 1991). Moreover, it is improper for the Court "to assume the role of advocate for a pro se litigant." Id. Thus, the Court cannot "supply additional facts, [or] construct a ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.