UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
December 12, 2005
NANCY CLAUSELL KNIGHT PLAINTIFF,
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION; BROOKLYN BUREAU OF COMMUNITY SERVICES; COALITION OF THE HOMELESS; NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT, DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Garaufis, United States District Judge
ORDER AND CIVIL JUDGMENT
On June 13, 2005, plaintiff filed this complaint pro se challenging her status as an "incompetent" and alleging various grievances she has encountered in securing housing. By Order dated August 9, 2005, the Court directed plaintiff to file an amended complaint within thirty days. Although plaintiff met the timing obligations imposed by the court, her amended complaint failed to meet the minimum pleading standards set forth in Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure since, much like her first complaint, it did not set forth what claims she brings against each defendant nor the legal theories underlying those claims.
However, by Order dated September 20, 2005, plaintiff was afforded thirty days leave to file a further amended complaint. Both of the Court's Orders directing plaintiff to amend her complaint stated that if plaintiff failed to comply with the Order within the time allowed, the complaint would be dismissed for failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted. On September 23, 2005, plaintiff submitted a "Statement of Claimant or Other Person" form from the Social Security Administration, a letter from the Urban Justice Center to the Social Security Administration regarding the administration's decision to "appoint a representative payee" for the plaintiff and a letter requesting her case be "transferred to the Bronx." Nothing in the submission sets forth what claims she brings against each defendant nor the legal theories underlying those claims. Plaintiff has not submitted any other documents. Accordingly, it is
ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That the complaint is hereby dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (e)(2)(B)(ii). The Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for purpose of an appeal. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962).
Nicholas G. Garaufis United States District Judge
© 1992-2006 VersusLaw Inc.