Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Bergstrom v. Barnhart

March 19, 2007

THOMAS G. BERGSTROM, PLAINTIFF,
v.
JO ANNE B. BARNHART, COMMISSIONER, SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, DEFENDANT.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Neal P. McCURN, Senior District Judge

MEMORANDUM-DECISION and ORDER

I. Introduction

The Clerk has sent to the Court for review a pro se complaint filed by Thomas G. Bergstrom. Plaintiff, who has not paid the filing fee, also filed an application for leave to proceed with this action in forma pauperis.

II. Discussion

(A) In Forma Pauperis Application

By Order of Magistrate Judge George H. Lowe filed January 22, 2007, plaintiff's in forma pauperis application was granted. Dkt. No. 3 (the "January Order").*fn1

(B) The Sufficiency of the Complaint

The Court must consider the sufficiency of the complaint in light of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). 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, even if a plaintiff meets the financial criteria to commence an action in forma pauperis, it is the Court's responsibility to determine that a complaint may properly be maintained in the District before it may permit the plaintiff to proceed with his or her action in forma pauperis. Id.

According to the facts set forth in the complaint, plaintiff applied for social security disability benefits in 1984 following an automobile accident. Plaintiff states that although he has provided ample medical evidence, and has complied with all applicable filing requirements, his claim remains open. Dkt. No. 1 at 2-3. Plaintiff states that he received a partial disability award in July, 2006, which covered the one year period April 7, 1984 to April 7, 1985. Plaintiff complains that he has been wrongfully denied full disability benefits for the thirteen year period between the accident and his "P.I.A. retirement in 1997." Dkt. No. 1 at 3.*fn2 Plaintiff claims that the government has engaged in a "deliberate exploitation" of disability claimants in an effort to deny claimants their just benefits and seeks compensation for the "deliberate and flagrant" violation of his constitutional rights. Id. at 5. For a complete statement of plaintiff's claims, reference is made to the complaint.

Plaintiff purports to maintain this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. ยง 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 by persons acting under color of state law. German v. Fed. Home Loan Mortg. Corp., 885 F.Supp. 537, 573 (S.D.N.Y. 1995) (citing Wilder v. ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.