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.

Hortense White v. Trenone Valarie

April 26, 2013

HORTENSE WHITE,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
TRENONE VALARIE, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gary S. Austin United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM, WITH LEAVE TO AMEND (Doc. 1-2.) THIRTY DAY DEADLINE TO FILE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

I. BACKGROUND

Hortense White ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff commenced this action on November 26, 2012, at the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, as case 12-6599. (Doc. 1.) On January 31, 2013, the court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania consolidated case 12-6599 [White v. Valarie] with case 12-6885 [White v. Central California Women's Facility], and transferred the consolidated action to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. (Doc. 8.)

Plaintiff's Complaint, filed on November 26, 2012, is now before the Court for screening.*fn1 (Doc. 1-2.)

II. SCREENING REQUIREMENT

The court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief against a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C. ' 1915A(a). The court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are legally Afrivolous or malicious,@ that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or that seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. ' 1915A(b)(1),(2). ANotwithstanding any filing fee, or any portion thereof, that may have been paid, the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that . . . the action or appeal fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.@ 28 U.S.C. ' 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).

III. PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT

Plaintiff is presently incarcerated at the California Institute for Women in Corona, California. It appears that Plaintiff claims arose at the Central California Women's Facility in Chowchilla, California, when Plaintiff was incarcerated there.

Plaintiff's eight-page form complaint is rambling and incoherent, and fails to state any cognizable claims under federal law. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009); Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 1965 (2007). The Court cannot decipher Plaintiff's allegations or determine who the defendants are. For example, a portion of Plaintiff's "Facts" follow:

"Here in California is to explainatory (sic) whole thing readily as Jealous, 'Quotas.' A deadlocked' (sic) and so also to making allerged (sic) of falsily (sic) imprisoned, Also confusion, with a Homie Hillbillie and wants to fall, of floor Hit, Having soon when I am released, of a framed up -- insignatory Escola C, of 9-17-10, five extra years straight since (2002) now (9-2-14) formal to changing of as short term and of Bet, Twenty one month's, their dramas, in(illegible) having in sprayed in the yard of cold hoses, also scenario, To winner in prize, Grant also Granted should removal ..."

Cmp. at 3 ¶2.D. The remainder of the complaint is similarly incoherent.

IV. RULE 8(a) OF THE FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE

Under federal notice pleading, a complaint is required to contain Aa short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief . . . .@ Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). Detailed factual allegations are not required, but A[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements, do not suffice.@ Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678 (citing Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555). While a plaintiff=s allegations are taken as true, courts Aare not required to indulge unwarranted inferences,@ Doe I v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 572 F.3d 677, 681 (9th Cir. 2009) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). Plaintiff must set forth Asufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to >state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.=@ Iqbal 556 U.S. at 678. While factual allegations are accepted as true, legal conclusions are not. Id. The mere possibility of misconduct falls short of meeting this plausibility standard. Id.

Plaintiff's complaint fails to comport with Rule 8(a)'s instruction that the complaint is only required to contain Aa short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.@ Plaintiff=s narrative does not clearly allege facts against any defendant. 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. Because Plaintiff ...


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.