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.

Smith v. MasterCard International

United States District Court, E.D. Missouri

December 15, 2016

CHARMANE SMITH, Plaintiff,
v.
MASTERCARD INTERNATIONAL, Defendant.

          MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

          CATHERINE D. PERRY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         This matter is before the Court upon the motion of plaintiff Charmane Smith for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. (Docket No. 2). Upon review of the financial affidavit plaintiff submitted in support of the motion, the Court has determined that plaintiff is unable to pay the filing fee. 28 U.S.C. § 1915. The motion will therefore be granted. In addition, plaintiff will be allowed the opportunity to submit an amended complaint.

         Standard of Review

         Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), the Court is required to dismiss a complaint filed in forma pauperis if it is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. To state a claim for relief, a complaint must plead more than “legal conclusions” and “[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action [that are] supported by mere conclusory statements.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009). A plaintiff must demonstrate a plausible claim for relief, which is more than a “mere possibility of misconduct.” Id. at 679. “A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.” Id. at 678. Determining whether a complaint states a plausible claim for relief is a context-specific task that requires the reviewing court to draw upon its judicial experience and common sense. Id. at 679.

         The Complaint

         Plaintiff commenced this action in this Court on November 28, 2016, naming MasterCard International as defendant. It is notable that plaintiff has been a very frequent pro se and in forma pauperis litigator in other United States District Courts, with one such Court noting her history of having filed “numerous, patently meritless actions.” Smith v. Dell, 2007 WL 3232037 at *1 (W.D. Tenn. October 31, 2007).

         Plaintiff alleges federal subject matter jurisdiction on the basis of diversity of citizenship pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332. For her claims against defendant, plaintiff alleges as follows:

My bank account(s) were hijacked and money was stolen by black hat hackers (online organized criminal gang). Security flaws of my credit and debit cards and linked accounts enabled tortious interference by the hackers - which caused me to be locked out of my accounts, theft from the accounts, and incorrect billing entries.

         Plaintiff seeks “actual, compensatory, continuing, consequential, lost expected benefit, per diem, attorneys fees, court & litigation fees, lawsuit funding fees, monetary & trebled damages - in the sum of $1, 000, 000.00 or more.” (Id. at 4). As the reason for seeking the amount claimed, plaintiff wrote:

$1, 000, 00.00 monetary damages
Trebled damages
Damages have accrued for at least 5 years
Damage to my personal & professional credit rating & viability has hindered my ...

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.