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.

Jefferson v. Fischer

United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, Southeastern Division

March 12, 2018

ELMER LEE JEFFERSON, Plaintiff,
v.
ZEL M. FISCHER, etal., Defendants.

          MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

          STEPHEN N. LIMBAUGH, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         Plaintiff seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis in this civil action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The motion is granted. Furthermore, based upon a review of the complaint, the Court finds that the complaint should be dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e).

         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 on its judicial experience and common sense. Id. at 679.

         When reviewing a complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), the Court accepts the well-pled facts as true. Furthermore, the Court liberally construes the allegations.

         The Complaint

         Plaintiff, a frequent filer of civil lawsuits in this Court, brings this complaint, alleging "fraud on the court." In his statement of the claim, he lists the following:

1. There was fraud upon the Court
2. The Court lacked jurisdiction to enter void judgment
3. The Sheriff was in contempt of Court
4. There was intentional infliction of emotional distress
5. There was wrongful incarceration 6. There was inadequate assistance of counsel
7. There was malicious abuse of process.

         For support, he states merely "see attached." Attached to the complaint are seventy pages from plaintiffs state court criminal proceeding. He includes grievances filed with the Missouri Department of Corrections in 2007 regarding his medical treatment in prison, correspondence with the Clerk of the Missouri Supreme Court, and documents filed with the Missouri Court of Appeals. In one document, ...


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.