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.

McCray v. Nassau County Medical Staff

December 28, 2009

HARRY L. MCCRAY, PLAINTIFF,
v.
NASSAU COUNTY MEDICAL STAFF, EDWARD RALLY*FN1, DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Seybert, District Judge

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Pending before the Court is Harry L. McCray's pro se Complaint against the Nassau County Medical Staff and Edward Reilly, along with an application to proceed in forma pauperis.*fn2

The Court grants Plaintiff's request to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) for the limited purposes of this Order, but for the reasons set forth below, the Complaint is dismissed.

BACKGROUND

Although Plaintiff filed his Complaint on a standard form, his allegations are virtually incomprehensible. Plaintiff alleges in part:

On or near March 204 or 205 [sic], I Harry L. McCray was arrested in Freeport NY DWLS and sentanced [sic] to 90 days. My claim is the Delbert indeferences [sic] of mental stress emotional pain and suffering lack of adequate medical care hindering and interference by state officials. After Joe Joblontsky x Sheriff of Nassau County lost his post in 1999 after the beating death of thomas pizzo at the jail. I was witness to the assault. Due to the abuse therates [sic] and harm I ricived [sic] plus food poisoning due to members defecation and urin [sic] in my food and on me by way of hypnois martin sabba skils [sic].

Plaintiff further alleges that he has lost all muscle mass and walking ability, and has mental illness "as a result to this treatment of staff and pet inmates that look for time cuts or early release." (Compl. ¶ IV.A). Plaintiff also seeks "a special DNA request as a matter of my imprisonment and the sexual abuse I suffered by the state officers with the use of martin sabba hypnosis skills." (Compl. ¶ IV.A).

Plaintiff seeks, among other things, genetic exculpatory evidence for a jury, "statements from experts to expose this from communicable disease made by the state," and ten million dollars. (Compl. ¶ V).

DISCUSSION

I. In Forma Pauperis Application

Upon review of Plaintiff's declaration in support of his application to proceed in forma pauperis, the Court determines that the Plaintiff's financial status qualifies him to commence this action without prepayment of the filing fees. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). Therefore, Plaintiff's request to proceed in forma pauperis is GRANTED.

II. Standard of Review

In reviewing the Complaint, the Court is mindful that Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and that his pleadings should be held "to less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers." Hughes v. Rowe, 449 U.S. 5, 9, 101 S.Ct. 173, 66 L.Ed. 2d 163 (1980); Sealed Plaintiff v. Sealed Defendant, 537 F.3d 185, 191 (2d Cir. 2008). However, pursuant to the in forma pauperis statute, the Court must dismiss a Complaint if it determines that 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).

A claim is "frivolous" if its "factual contentions are clearly baseless, such as when allegations are the product of delusion or fantasy" or if it is "based on an indisputably meritless legal theory" - that is, when it "lacks an arguable basis in law, or [when] a dispositive defense clearly exists on the face of the complaint." Livingston ...


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.