RUSHING v. STATE OF MICHIGAN, No. 1:2021cv01905 - Document 3 (D.D.C. 2021)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION Signed by Judge Carl J. Nichols on 10/12/2021. (znmg)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
RUSHING v. STATE OF MICHIGAN Doc. 3 Case 1:21-cv-01905-UNA Document 3 Filed 10/12/21 Page 1 of 2 FILED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA SHAUN RUSHING, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiff, v. THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Defendant. OCT. 12, 2021 Clerk, U.S. District & Bankruptcy Court for the District of Columbia Civil Action No. 21-01905 (UNA) MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter is before the court on its initial review of plaintiff’s pro se complaint and application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Pro se litigants must comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Jarrell v. Tisch, 656 F. Supp. 237, 239 (D.D.C. 1987). Rule 8(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires complaints to contain “(1) a short and plain statement of the grounds for the court’s jurisdiction [and] (2) a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a); see Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 67879 (2009); Ciralsky v. CIA, 355 F.3d 661, 668-71 (D.C. Cir. 2004). The Rule 8 standard ensures that defendants receive fair notice of the claim being asserted so that they can prepare a responsive answer and an adequate defense and determine whether the doctrine of res judicata applies. Brown v. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977). Plaintiff alleges that a Michigan state agency has denied his requests for medical coverage, and he brings this lawsuit demanding insurance and an award of $110 trillion. As drafted, plaintiff’s pro se complaint fails to comply with the minimal pleading standard set forth in Rule 1 Dockets.Justia.com Case 1:21-cv-01905-UNA Document 3 Filed 10/12/21 Page 2 of 2 8(a). It fails to state a basis for this Court’s jurisdiction and articulate a claim showing plaintiff’s entitlement to an award of $110 trillion. The Court, therefore, will dismiss the complaint without prejudice and will grant the application to proceed in forma pauperis. An Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is issued separately. DATE: October 12, 2021 ______________________ CARL J. NICHOLS United States District Judge 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
