Moodie v. James

Background

Donna Hope Moodie, proceeding without a lawyer, filed this action against New York State Attorney General Letitia James and the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). She invoked federal-question jurisdiction and alleged that her rights under the Eleventh Amendment had been violated.

On May 22, 2024, the Court dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim for relief. It found that Moodie had not complied with Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which requires a short and plain statement showing why the plaintiff is entitled to relief, because her allegations were largely incomprehensible. The Court gave her 30 days to file an amended complaint addressing those deficiencies and warned that failure to do so would result in dismissal.

What Moodie Filed

Instead of filing an amended complaint, Moodie submitted two letters. The letters included allegations that Attorney General James was impersonating Moodie's sister, that people had impersonated Moodie in connection with the case, and that James and others had engaged in misconduct. The letters also referred to ERISA, the Social Security Act, and an earlier related proceeding in the Eastern District of New York, No. 23-CV-6071.

Court’s Analysis and Ruling

The Court declined to treat the letters as an amended complaint because they did not address, much less cure, the pleading deficiencies identified in the May 22 order. Because Moodie did not file the amended complaint the Court had directed, the Court dismissed the action for failure to state a claim on which relief could be granted under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).

The Court terminated all other pending matters and directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment. It also certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying the filing fee. The opinion does not state that the dismissal was with or without prejudice.