Adams v. City of Harrison, Arkansas ( 2022 )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
DALE B. ADAMS, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. 22-0692 (UNA)
)
CITY OF HARRISON, ARKANSAS, et al., )
)
Defendants. )
MEMORANDUM OPINION
A pro se litigant’s pleadings are held to less stringent standards than would be applied to
formal pleadings drafted by lawyers. 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).
Plaintiff, an Arkansas resident, alleges assorted violations of constitutionally-protected
rights. According to plaintiff, unknown agents of the federal government have surveilled his
1
activities and obtained and disseminated his personal identifying and medical information; his
neighbors (whom plaintiff believes to be government agents) harass him and his wife by blowing
whistles at them day and night, hacking their computers, tampering with their mail, and using
bioweapons to infect them; and local and state officials have not responded appropriately to their
written complaints. Among other relief, plaintiff demands a declaratory judgment, unspecified
monetary damages, and injunctive relief.
Notwithstanding the length of the complaint and the number of offenses it alleges, the
Court cannot identify a short and plain statement showing plaintiff’s entitlement to the relief he
demands. As drafted, the complaint fails to comply with Rule 8(a), and no defendant can be
expected to prepare a proper response to it. For these reasons, the Court will dismiss the
complaint without prejudice and grant plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis. An
Order is issued separately.
DATE: April 4, 2022 /s/
AMIT P. MEHTA
United States District Judge
2