Daniel Keith Wilson v. M. De Arton, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California dismisses Daniel Keith Wilson’s pro se complaint for failure to provide a short and plain statement of intelligible claims, while granting leave to amend. The court grants in forma pauperis status and recommends denial of the plaintiff’s motions for temporary restraining orders and related relief.

Holdings

1. The complaint did not satisfy Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2) because it failed to provide a short and plain statement of intelligible claims showing that plaintiff was entitled to relief; it was therefore subject to dismissal on screening.
2. The complaint was dismissed with leave to amend, and any amended complaint had to be complete in itself, titled “First Amended Complaint,” and filed within thirty days.
3. Plaintiff's motions for temporary restraining orders and related relief were recommended for denial because he had not shown a likelihood of success on the merits.
4. Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis was granted.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the complaint satisfied the mandatory screening requirements and the short-and-plain pleading requirement of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2).
2. Whether the complaint should be dismissed with leave to amend.
3. Whether plaintiff's motions for temporary restraining orders and related relief should be denied for failure to show a likelihood of success on the merits.
4. Whether plaintiff should be granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis.

Disposition

other