Sinclair v. Sinclair

United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas

Sinclair v. Sinclair

Trial Court Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS NORTHERN DIVISION

DOMINIQUE SINCLAIR PLAINTIFF

V. No. 3:20-cv-367-DPM

JIMMY SINCLAIR; BRYANT and THERESA WHITE; FRED WHITFIELD; ALEX DILLARD; SAMUEL DOE DEFENDANTS

ORDER 1. Sinclair’s application to proceed in forma pauperis, Doc. 1, is granted. He reports having no income, no assets, and living with friends. 2. The Court must screen Sinclair’s complaint.

28 U.S.C. § 1915

(e)(2). Sinclair’s claim that Defendants are using drones and cameras to threaten him with harm is fanciful and doesn’t state a claim. Denton v. Hernandez,

504 U.S. 25, 32-33

(1992);

28 U.S.C. § 1915

(e)(2)(B). The Court will dismiss the case without prejudice. So Ordered.

D.P. Marshall Jr. United States District Judge 17 Novem A02x0

Reference

Status
Unknown