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.

Durrett v. GMF-Serenity Towers, LLC

United States District Court, W.D. Tennessee, Western Division

September 30, 2014

EUNICE PAYNE DURRETT, Plaintiff,
v.
GMF-SERENITY TOWERS, LLC, SHEILA HOOKS, and MEMPHIS HOUSING AUTHORITY, Defendants.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION FOR SUA SPONTE DISMISSAL

DIANE K. VESCOVO, District Judge.

On September 18, 2014, the plaintiff, Eunice Payne Durrett ("Durrett"), a resident of Memphis, Tennessee, filed a pro se complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, (Compl., ECF No. 1), accompanied by a motion seeking leave to proceed in forma pauperis, (ECF No. 2). In an order issued on September 22, 2014, the court granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis. (ECF No. 4.) This case has been referred to the United States Magistrate Judge for management and for all pretrial matters for determination and/or report and recommendation as appropriate. (Admin. Order 2013-05, Apr. 29, 2013.) For the reasons that follow, it is recommended that this case be dismissed for failure to state a claim.

I. PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT

Durrett's court-supplied complaint form is entitled "Complaint for Violation of Civil Rights Under 42 U.S.C. § 1983." (Compl., ECF No. 1.) The complaint names GMF-Serenity Towers, LLC, HCV representative Sheilah Hooks, and Memphis Housing Authority as defendants. ( Id. )

In the "Statement of Claim" section of her complaint against the defendants, Durrett hand-wrote:

Eunice Payne Durrett requested reasonable accommodations to move to a lower floor several times away from noise because living on the 8th floor was aggrevating [sic] her back. Documentation has been provided to: Mrs. Laverne Perkins, Torrye Thomas, Ms. Sybil Dean from 2013-2014.

( Id. ¶ IV.) For relief, Durrett requests, "Pay me for all the pain and suffering mgmt put me through for no reason at all. Writ [sic] me a check to cover the costs." ( Id. ¶ V.)

II. PROPOSED CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

A. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) Screening

Pursuant to Local Rule 4.1(a), service will not issue in a pro se case where the pro se plaintiff has been granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis until the complaint has been screened under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). The clerk is authorized to issue summonses to pro se litigants only after that review is complete and an order of the court issues. This report and recommendation will constitute the court's screening.

The court is required to screen in forma pauperis complaints and to dismiss any complaint, or any portion thereof, if 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 ...

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.