Alvandra Allen v. Bill Lee , 641 F. App'x 595 ( 2016 )


Menu:
  •                         NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION
    To be cited only in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1
    United States Court of Appeals
    For the Seventh Circuit
    Chicago, Illinois 60604
    Submitted April 13, 2016 *
    Decided April 13, 2016
    Before
    JOEL M. FLAUM, Circuit Judge
    KENNETH F. RIPPLE, Circuit Judge
    DAVID F. HAMILTON, Circuit Judge
    No. 16-1250
    ALVANDRA J. ALLEN,                             Appeal from the United States District
    Plaintiff-Appellant,                       Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin.
    v.                                       No. 15-cv-1566-PP
    EMMANUEL or BILL LEE,                          Pamela Pepper,
    Defendant-Appellee.                        Judge.
    ORDER
    Alvandra Allen sued “Emmanuel or Bill Lee” for abusing him shortly after his
    birth in 1971 by, among other things, removing his pancreas, shooting him in the head
    (an episode in which he says he “died and came back to life”), and replacing his soul
    with an evil spirit. The district court screened the complaint under 
    28 U.S.C. § 1915
    (e)(2)(B) and dismissed it because it was frivolous and failed to state a claim.
    * The defendant was not served with process in the district court and is not
    participating in this appeal. After examining the appellant’s brief and the record, we
    have concluded that the case is appropriate for summary disposition.
    See FED. R. APP. P. 34(a)(2)(C).
    No. 16-1250                                                                          Page 2
    Allen, the court ruled, did not allege any federal or constitutional violations and, to the
    extent he tried to allege any criminal charges, he lacked standing to do so.
    On appeal Allen states that his “legal argument” is “to gather everyone that was
    there, especially my doctor at birth,” in order to hold the defendant responsible for his
    “violent criminal acts.” Allen develops no reasoned basis for disturbing the district
    court’s ruling that his allegations are frivolous. See FED. R. APP. P. 28(a)(8)(A);
    see also Neitzke v. Williams, 
    490 U.S. 319
    , 327–28 (1989) (district courts may dismiss suits
    describing “fantastic or delusional scenarios”). We therefore AFFIRM the district court’s
    judgment.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 16-1250

Citation Numbers: 641 F. App'x 595

Judges: Per Curiam

Filed Date: 4/13/2016

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 1/13/2023