1:25-cv-02257•ELMORE v. CHILD SUPPORT SOUTH CAROLINA
Texte intégral
1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA MATTHEW ROBERT ELMORE, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 25-2257 (UNA) ) CHILD SUPPORT SOUTH CAROLINA, ) ) Defendant. ) MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter is before the Court on review of plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis and pro se civil complaint. The Court GRANTS the application and, for the reasons stated below, DISMISSES the complaint and this civil action without prejudice. The Court has reviewed plaintiff’s complaint, keeping in mind 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 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 standard of Rule 8 is to give fair notice to the defendants of the claim being asserted, sufficient to prepare a responsive answer, to prepare an adequate defense and to determine whether the doctrine of res judicata applies. Brown v. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977). Case 1:25-cv-02257-UNA Document 3 Filed 01/02/26 Page 1 of 2
2 The instant complaint is indeed short, yet it fails to allege facts even remotely capable of articulating a plausible legal claim. Even if this Court had the authority “to stop child support,” Compl. at 5, and to reinstate plaintiff’s license, see id, it cannot award plaintiff “$1 gozillion,” id. As drafted, the complaint fails to meet the minimum pleading standard set forth in Rule 8, and it will be dismissed. An Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is issued separately. DATE: January 2, 2026 /s/ ANA C. REYES United States District Judge Case 1:25-cv-02257-UNA Document 3 Filed 01/02/26 Page 2 of 2
Vous vous demandez comment ce texte s’applique à votre situation ?
Consultation gratuite, sans engagement
Décrivez votre situation. Notre équipe vous recontactera par e-mail pour votre consultation.
Poursuivez vos recherches dans ChatGPT ou Claude
Connectez Omnilex pour rechercher dans le corpus juridique depuis votre assistant IA.