Roy Hartman v. Tanshanna Golden, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma dismissed Roy Hartman’s pro se complaint without prejudice for failing to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8. The court found that the complaint did not provide sufficient facts showing entitlement to relief or allege a jurisdictional basis, and permitted Hartman to file an amended complaint within 14 days.

Holdings

1. Pro se litigants are not excused from Rule 8's requirements, although their pleadings must be liberally construed.
2. The complaint failed to comply with Rule 8 because it alleged no facts showing entitlement to relief and failed to allege a jurisdictional basis.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the complaint satisfied Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)'s requirements for stating the grounds for jurisdiction, a claim showing entitlement to relief, and the relief sought.
2. Whether a pro se litigant is excused from complying with Rule 8.

Disposition

dismissed