Jenkins v. CO Dept. Social Svc. ( 1999 )

F I L E D
United States Court of Appeals
Tenth Circuit
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
JUL 27 1999
TENTH CIRCUIT
__________________________ PATRICK FISHER
Clerk
JERRY J. JENKINS,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v. No. 98-1469
(D. Colo.)
COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF (D.Ct. No. 98-D-1867)
SOCIAL SERVICES DIVISION OF
VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION,
Defendant-Appellee.
____________________________
ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
Before BRORBY, EBEL, and LUCERO, Circuit Judges.
After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined
unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of
this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is
therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
*
This order and judgment is not binding precedent except under the doctrines of
law of the case, res judicata and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the
citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under
the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.
Appellant Jerry J. Jenkins appeals the district court’s order dismissing her
amended civil complaint, without prejudice, for failure to comply with the
pleading requirements in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a). We affirm.
We review the district court’s dismissal of a complaint under Rule 8(a) for
abuse of discretion. See Salahuddin v. Cuomo, 861 F.2d 40, 42 (2d Cir. 1988).
Rule 8(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires that Ms. Jenkins’
civil complaint contain a short and plain statement of the claim showing she is
entitled to relief. Carpenter v. Williams, 86 F.3d 1015, 1016 (10th Cir. 1996).
Because Ms. Jenkins brings this action pro se, we construe all her pleadings
liberally and to a less stringent standard than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers.
Hall v. Bellmon, 935 F.2d 1106, 1110 (10th Cir. 1991) (citing Haines v. Kerner,
404 U.S. 519, 520-21 (1972)).
Having reviewed the record with these standards in mind, we determine the
pleadings filed in the district court and her brief on appeal plainly demonstrate
that Ms. Jenkins fails to meet the pleading requirements of the Federal Rules of
Civil and Appellate Procedure. Her documents consist of vague and conclusory
allegations of incidents relating to physical and emotional injuries and alleged
discrimination without sufficient identification of the responsible parties,
-2-
applicable legal theories, or facts surrounding each incident. From her pleadings,
we are unable to discern the precise basis for her allegations or against whom she
directs the charges of wrongdoing. Thus, her amended complaint fails to give the
opposing party, the Colorado Department of Social Services, fair notice of the
basis of the claim against it so that it may respond, or allow the court to conclude
that the allegations, if proved, show she is entitled to relief. See Monument
Builders of Greater Kansas City, Inc. v. American Cemetery Ass’n of Kansas, 891
F.2d 1473, 1480 (10th Cir. 1989), cert. denied, 495 U.S. 930 (1990). For these
reasons, we agree with district court that her amended complaint, even when
liberally construed, fails to meet the requirements of Rule 8(a).
Accordingly, we deny Ms. Jenkins’ motion to proceed in forma pauperis
and AFFIRM the order of the district court dismissing the amended complaint
without prejudice.
Entered by the Court:
WADE BRORBY
United States Circuit Judge
-3-