The opinion of the court was delivered by: Norman A. Mordue, Chief U.S. District Court Judge
The Clerk has sent to the Court a civil rights Complaint, together with an application to proceed in forma pauperis, filed by Sylvia Jenkins ("Plaintiff" or "Jenkins")*fn1
In her pro se Complaint, Plaintiff alleges that three unidentified males beat her sister to death on February 7, 1990. See Docket No. 1.
Section 1915(e) directs that when a Plaintiff seeks to proceed in forma pauperis, the Court:
(2) [S]hall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that -***
(B) the action ... (i) is frivolous or malicious; (ii) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or (iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief.
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). Thus, the Court must determine that a Complaint is proper before it permits a plaintiff to proceed with his or her action in forma pauperis. Id.
Plaintiff brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983. Section 1983 establishes a cause of action for "the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws" of the United States. German v. Fed. Home Loan Mortg. Corp., 885 F.Supp. 537, 573 (S.D.N.Y. 1995) (citing Wilder v. Virginia Hosp. Ass'n, 496 U.S. 498, 508 (1990) (quoting 42 U.S.C. § 1983)) (footnote omitted). The "applicable statute of limitations for § 1983 actions arising in New York requires claims to be brought within three years." Pinaud v. County of Suffolk, 52 F.3d 1139, 1156 (2d Cir. 1995).
In the complaint, Plaintiff alleges that the events occurred in February of 1990. The Complaint is dated August 21, 2006, and was filed on August 21, 2006. Thus, Plaintiff's claims are barred by the applicable statute of limitations and must be dismissed.
In light of the foregoing, Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis is denied as moot.
For the reasons stated above, the pleading, as presented to this Court, cannot be supported by an arguable basis in law and must therefore be ...