|
ALTER W. BLANCK, Plaintiff, v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, BUD
HALL, GERRY MAGNUSON and AL NESS, Defendants. 1
1 The docket identifies defendants as "Bud Wall" and "Greg Magnuson."
Closer inspection of the complaint, however, reveals that defendants'
names are "Bud Hall" and "Gerry Magnuson." (Compl. at 2.) Therefore,
the docket will be amended accordingly.
Case No. 07-C-0276
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 95605
December 20, 2007, Decided
December 21, 2007, Filed
CORE TERMS: chemical, forma pauperis, filing fee, prisoner's, prison,
trust account, statute of limitations, frivolous', injunction,
malicious, pro se, appoint counsel, injunctive relief, screening,
indigent, citations omitted, federal agencies, cause of action, moving
party, irreparable harm, partial, monthly, exempt, appointment of
counsel, prosecute, civil rights, civil litigants, certified copy,
immediately preceding, governmental entity
COUNSEL: [*1] Walter W Blanck, Plaintiff, Pro se, Green Bay, WI.
JUDGES: LYNN ADELMAN, District Judge.
OPINION BY: LYNN ADELMAN
OPINION
DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, Walter W. Blanck, filed this pro se civil rights action
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. =A7 1983. Before me are the following
applications: (1) plaintiff's petition to proceed in forma pauperis;
(2) plaintiff's two motions to appoint counsel; and (3) plaintiff's
motion for order.
I. IFP PETITION AND SCREENING
A. Motion to Proceed IFP
Plaintiff is required to pay the statutory filing fee of $ 350.00 for
this action. 28 U.S.C. =A7 1915(b)(1). If a prisoner does not have the
money to pay the filing fee, he or she can request leave to proceed in
forma pauperis. To proceed with an action in forma pauperis, the
prisoner must complete a petition and affidavit to proceed in forma
pauperis and return it to the court with a certified copy of his trust
account statement showing transactions for the prior six months. The
court then assesses and, when funds exist, collects from plaintiff at
the time the action is filed an initial partial filing fee of 20% of
the average monthly deposits to or the average monthly balance in his
trust account for the six-month period immediately preceding the
filing [*2] of the complaint. 2
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - Footnotes - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
2 In no event will a prisoner be prohibited from bringing a civil
action because he or she has no assets and no means by which to pay
the initial partial filing fee. 28 U.S.C. =A7 1915(b)(4).
- - - - - - - - - - - - End Footnotes- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
In this case, plaintiff has filed a certified copy of his prison trust
account statement for the six-month period immediately preceding the
filing of his complaint. He has been assessed and paid an initial
partial filing fee of $ 62.40. Thus, plaintiff will be permitted to
proceed in forma pauperis. The balance of the filing fee will be
collected as set forth below.
B. Screening
I am required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief
against a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental
entity. 28 U.S.C. =A7 1915A(a). I must dismiss a complaint or portion
thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are legally "frivolous
or malicious," that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be
granted, or that seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune
from such relief. 28 U.S.C. =A7 1915A(b).
A claim is legally frivolous when it lacks an arguable basis either in
law or in fact. Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 31, 112 S. Ct. 1728,
118 L. Ed. 2d 340 (1992); Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325, 109
S. Ct. 1827, 104 L. Ed. 2d 338 (1989); [*3] Hutchinson ex rel. Baker
v. Spink, 126 F.3d 895, 900 (7th Cir. 1997). I may, therefore, dismiss
a claim as frivolous where it is based on an indisputably meritless
legal theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless.
Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 327. "Malicious," although sometimes treated as a
synonym for "frivolous," "is more usefully construed as intended to
harass." Lindell v. McCallum, 352 F.3d 1107, 1109-10 (7th Cir. 2003)
(citations omitted).
To avoid dismissal for failure to state a claim, the complaint must
contain a "short and plain statement of the claim showing that the
pleader is entitled to relief." Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). It is not
necessary for plaintiff to plead specific facts; his statement need
only "give the defendant fair notice of what the . . . claim is and
the grounds upon which it rests." Erickson v. Pardus, U.S. ,
127 S. Ct. 2197, 2200, 167 L. Ed. 2d 1081 (2007) (citations omitted).
In deciding whether the complaint states a claim, I must accept as
true all of the factual allegations contained in the complaint. Bell
Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, U.S. , 127 S. Ct. 1955, 1965, 167 L.
Ed. 2d 929 (2007). There is no heightened pleading requirement for pro
se prisoner civil rights complaints. [*4] Thomson v. Washington, 362
F.3d 969, 970-71 (7th Cir. 2004). Of course, if a complaint pleads
facts that show that a plaintiff does not have a claim, the complaint
should be dismissed "without further ado." Id. at 970.
To state a claim for relief under 42 U.S.C. =A7 1983, a plaintiff must
allege: 1) that he was deprived of a right secured by the Constitution
or laws of the United States; and 2) that the deprivation was visited
upon him by a person acting under color of state law. Gomez v. Toledo,
446 U.S. 635, 640, 100 S. Ct. 1920, 64 L. Ed. 2d 572 (1980). I am
obliged to give plaintiff's pro se allegations, "however inartfully
pleaded," a liberal construction. See Erickson, 127 S. Ct. at 2200
(quoting Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 106, 97 S. Ct. 285, 50 L. Ed.
2d 251 (1976)).
1. Background
An initial comment is necessary with respect to the complaint in this
action. The complaint was filed on March 21, 2007, in three
installments. However, plaintiff subsequently filed several
attachments to the complaint and numerous additional documents
elaborating on the complaint allegations, including pieces of evidence
and various memoranda. In the interest of fairness to plaintiff, I
will review all documents on file when screening this case pursuant to
28 U.S.C. =A7 1915A(a).
Plaintiff [*5] is currently incarcerated at Green Bay Correctional
Institution. Defendant Bud Hall is the Supervisor of the Milwaukee
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). Defendants Gerry Magnuson and
Al Ness are FBI Agents. The complaint also names the FBI as a
defendant.
The story behind this case, as told by plaintiff, begins in 1975, when
plaintiff began working for the FBI, the CIA and the ATF. During 1975,
defendant Hall tested "life-altering" chemicals on plaintiff to
develop him for FBI use. Defendants Magnuson and Ness put these
chemicals into coffee cups that they gave to plaintiff while he was
sitting in an agency vehicle.
In November, 1975, plaintiff was taken to see a rogue ATF Agent named
Ed Truxa. Agent Truxa used plaintiff as an informant in a case
involving a Milwaukee gun store.
Then, in 1976, Agent Truxa took plaintiff to an ATF agency meeting in
Waukesha County, where he was introduced to George Bush, Sr. During
the meeting, plaintiff was told to get handgun and rifle shooting
samples for Agent Truxa. Plaintiff was given a written examination and
subjecte
|
| |
| |
doubtful!
|
| |
| |
doubtful!
1979: http://tinwiki.org/wiki/Carter_Assassination_Attempt
|
| |
| |
hat proves my method works. Ernie
WALTER W. BLANCK, Plaintiff, v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, BUD
HALL, GERRY MAGNUSON and AL NESS, Defendants. 1
1 The docket identifies defendants as "Bud Wall" and "Greg Magnuson."
Closer inspection of the complaint, however, reveals that defendants'
names are "Bud Hall" and "Gerry Magnuson." (Compl. at 2.) Therefore,
the docket will be amended accordingly.
Case No. 07-C-0276
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 95605
December 20, 2007, Decided
December 21, 2007, Filed
CORE TERMS: chemical, forma pauperis, filing fee, prisoner's, prison,
trust account, statute of limitations, frivolous', injunction,
malicious, pro se, appoint counsel, injunctive relief, screening,
indigent, citations omitted, federal agencies, cause of action, moving
party, irreparable harm, partial, monthly, exempt, appointment of
counsel, prosecute, civil rights, civil litigants, certified copy,
immediately preceding, governmental entity
COUNSEL: [*1] Walter W Blanck, Plaintiff, Pro se, Green Bay, WI.
JUDGES: LYNN ADELMAN, District Judge.
OPINION BY: LYNN ADELMAN
OPINION
DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, Walter W. Blanck, filed this pro se civil rights action
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. Before me are the following
applications: (1) plaintiff's petition to proceed in forma pauperis;
(2) plaintiff's two motions to appoint counsel; and (3) plaintiff's
motion for order.
I. IFP PETITION AND SCREENING
A. Motion to Proceed IFP
Plaintiff is required to pay the statutory filing fee of $ 350.00 for
this action. 28 U.S.C. 1915(b)(1). If a prisoner does not have the
money to pay the filing fee, he or she can request leave to proceed in
forma pauperis. To proceed with an action in forma pauperis, the
prisoner must complete a petition and affidavit to proceed in forma
pauperis and return it to the court with a certified copy of his trust
account statement showing transactions for the prior six months. The
court then assesses and, when funds exist, collects from plaintiff at
the time the action is filed an initial partial filing fee of 20% of
the average monthly deposits to or the average monthly balance in his
trust account for the six-month period immediately preceding the
filing [*2] of the complaint. 2
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - Footnotes - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
2 In no event will a prisoner be prohibited from bringing a civil
action because he or she has no assets and no means by which to pay
the initial partial filing fee. 28 U.S.C. 1915(b)(4).
- - - - - - - - - - - - End Footnotes- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
In this case, plaintiff has filed a certified copy of his prison trust
account statement for the six-month period immediately preceding the
filing of his complaint. He has been assessed and paid an initial
partial filing fee of $ 62.40. Thus, plaintiff will be permitted to
proceed in forma pauperis. The balance of the filing fee will be
collected as set forth below.
B. Screening
I am required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief
against a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental
entity. 28 U.S.C. 1915A(a). I must dismiss a complaint or portion
thereof if the prisoner has raised claims that are legally "frivolous
or malicious," that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be
granted, or that seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune
from such relief. 28 U.S.C. 1915A(b).
A claim is legally frivolous when it lacks an arguable basis either in
law or in fact. Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 31, 112 S. Ct. 1728,
118 L. Ed. 2d 340 (1992); Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325, 109
S. Ct. 1827, 104 L. Ed. 2d 338 (1989); [*3] Hutchinson ex rel. Baker
v. Spink, 126 F.3d 895, 900 (7th Cir. 1997). I may, therefore, dismiss
a claim as frivolous where it is based on an indisputably meritless
legal theory or where the factual contentions are clearly baseless.
Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 327. "Malicious," although sometimes treated as a
synonym for "frivolous," "is more usefully construed as intended to
harass." Lindell v. McCallum, 352 F.3d 1107, 1109-10 (7th Cir. 2003)
(citations omitted).
To avoid dismissal for failure to state a claim, the complaint must
contain a "short and plain statement of the claim showing that the
pleader is entitled to relief." Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). It is not
necessary for plaintiff to plead specific facts; his statement need
only "give the defendant fair notice of what the . . . claim is and
the grounds upon which it rests." Erickson v. Pardus, U.S. ,
127 S. Ct. 2197, 2200, 167 L. Ed. 2d 1081 (2007) (citations omitted).
In deciding whether the complaint states a claim, I must accept as
true all of the factual allegations contained in the complaint. Bell
Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, U.S. , 127 S. Ct. 1955, 1965, 167 L.
Ed. 2d 929 (2007). There is no heightened pleading requirement for pro
se prisoner civil rights complaints. [*4] Thomson v. Washington, 362
F.3d 969, 970-71 (7th Cir. 2004). Of course, if a complaint pleads
facts that show that a plaintiff does not have a claim, the complaint
should be dismissed "without further ado." Id. at 970.
To state a claim for relief under 42 U.S.C. 1983, a plaintiff must
allege: 1) that he was deprived of a right secured by the Constitution
or laws of the United States; and 2) that the deprivation was visited
upon him by a person acting under color of state law. Gomez v. Toledo,
446 U.S. 635, 640, 100 S. Ct. 1920, 64 L. Ed. 2d 572 (1980). I am
obliged to give plaintiff's pro se allegations, "however inartfully
pleaded," a liberal construction. See Erickson, 127 S. Ct. at 2200
(quoting Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 106, 97 S. Ct. 285, 50 L. Ed.
2d 251 (1976)).
1. Background
An initial comment is necessary with respect to the complaint in this
action. The complaint was filed on March 21, 2007, in three
installments. However, plaintiff subsequently filed several
attachments to the complaint and numerous additional documents
elaborating on the complaint allegations, including pieces of evidence
and various memoranda. In the interest of fairness to plaintiff, I
will review all documents on file when screening this case pursuant to
28 U.S.C. 1915A(a).
Plaintiff [*5] is currently incarcerated at Green Bay Correctional
Institution. Defendant Bud Hall is the Supervisor of the Milwaukee
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). Defendants Gerry Magnuson and
Al Ness are FBI Agents. The complaint also names the FBI as a
defendant.
The story behind this case, as told by plaintiff, begins in 1975, when
plaintiff began working for the FBI, the CIA and the ATF. During 1975,
defendant Hall tested "life-altering" chemicals on plaintiff to
develop him for FBI use. Defendants Magnuson and Ness put these
chemicals into coffee cups that they gave to plaintiff while he was
sitting in an agency vehicle.
In November, 1975, plaintiff was taken to see a rogue ATF Agent named
Ed Truxa. Agent Truxa used plaintiff as an informant in a case
involving a Milwaukee gun store.
Then, in 1976, Agent Truxa took plaintiff to an ATF agency meeting in
Waukesha County, where he was introduced to George Bush, Sr. During
the meeting
|
| |
| |
|
