QTAISH v. WASHINGTON, DC, No. 1:2023cv03638 - Document 4 (D.D.C. 2023)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Beryl A. Howell on 12/28/2023. (zsl)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA INEZ QTAISH, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiff, v. WASHINGTON, DC, Defendant. Civil Action No. 23-3638 (UNA) MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter is before the Court on review of pro se plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) and her civil complaint. The IFP application is GRANTED and, for the reasons stated below, the complaint and this civil action are DISMISSED without prejudice. Plaintiff’s complaint must be reviewed mindful that complaints filed by pro se litigants are held to less stringent standards than are 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(a) 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 pleading standard set out in Rule 8 is to give sufficient fair notice to a defendant of the claim being asserted so that the defendant may prepare a responsive answer and an adequate defense and to enable a determination of whether the doctrine of res judicata applies. Brown v. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977). 1 Plaintiff alleges that she has attempted, unsuccessfully, to obtain a non-driver identification card at the District of Columbia’s Department of Motor Vehicles, see Compl. at 1, and to rent a Post Office Box, see id. at 2, because she was not receiving mail at her current residence. The complaint neither articulates a legal claim nor demands relief of any sort. Indeed, so few facts are alleged that the named defendant would have no adequate notice of the legal claims. Consequently, as drafted, the complaint fails to meet the minimal pleading standard set forth in Rule 8. An Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is issued separately. DATE: December 28, 2023 BERYL A. HOWELL 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.
