Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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

Kenny Beane v. Nicholas Mendez

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS


October 7, 2011

KENNY BEANE, PLAINTIFF,
v.
NICHOLAS MENDEZ, DEFENDANT.

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

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

District Court, alleging that Nicholas Mendez had violated his On October 4, 2011, Kenny Beane filed a pro se complaint in this United States

filed a motion for leave to proceed of counsel (Doc. 3).

civil rights. Additionally, Beane

lawsuit to proceed without prepayment of fees.

in forma pauperis

(Doc. 2) and a motion for appointment

In granting a motion for pauper

See status,

a federal

district court authorizes

a

28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(a)(1)("any

court of the

United States

may authorize the commencement . of any suit . without prepayment

represent any person unable to afford counsel."

of

fees..")

. Additionally, § 1915(e)(1) authorizes a federal court to re

28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1) quest an attorney to

Before the Court can grant pauper status or appoint counsel, however, it must

complaint if (a) the allegation of poverty is untrue; (b) carefully screen the complaint. Section1915(e)(2) requires federal courts to dismiss the

(c) the action fails to state a claim upon which relief monetary relief from a defendan

can be granted; or (d) the action seeks the action is frivolous or malicious;

t who is immune from such relief.

28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)

Case 3:11-cv-00900-MJR-SCW Document 5 Filed 10/07/11 Page 2 of 3 Page ID #16

However, it cannot determine if the action is frivolous or mali

In the case at bar, the Court is satisfied from Beane's affidav

if an action is frivolous or without merit is whether the plain

cious. The test for determining it that he is indigent.

on the law or facts in support of the claim. Furthermore, when assessing a petition to proceed

tiff can make a rational argument

Neitzke v. Williams

, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989)

should deny leave to proceed

).

inquire into the merits of the petitioner's claim, and if the c in forma pauperis

court finds them to be frivolous, it

, a district court should

in forma pauperis

Lucien v. Roegner

, 682 F.2d 625, 626 (7th

Cir. 1982

malicious. Beane's complaint simply does not contain enough fa

The Court cannot determine that Beane's cause ctual allegations to determine of action is not frivolous or

that his claim has merit. Beane tells the Court which of his c Defendant Mendez has violated, but he does not describe the facts onstitutional of what happened between rights he thinks

of what happened between him and Mendez before the Court can de him and Mendez that caused those violations. The Court must know Beane's view of the facts

to proceed without prepayment of fees.

cide whether to allow him

explaining the facts that gave rise to the violations alleged i

Accordingly, the Court

Beane to file n the complaint by a supplement to his complaint

. The Court

ORDERS

October 28, 2011

October 28, 2011.

RESERVES RULING

on Beane's pending motions (Docs. 2 & 3) until after

October 28, 2011,

The Court

in dismissal of this action. Moreover, failure to describe in Beane that failure to file a supplement to his complaint by

WARNS

WILL RESULT

the supplement the facts on which Beane's claims are based in a

in dismissal of this action for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be

more coherent manner

MAY

RESULT

granted.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

MICHAEL J. REAGAN United States District Judge

20111007

© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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