Umberger v. City of Santa Rosa

Background

Donald E. Umberger filed the action against the City of Santa Rosa and other defendants. He alleged that the City was “extrajudicially evicting” him from property where he had kept a trailer and asked the court to stop the alleged eviction and harassment. He also filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis (without paying filing fees). The court noted that he was self-employed as a handyman, earned approximately $1,200 per month, and had approximately $500 in monthly expenses, not including gas.

Umberger separately sought a temporary restraining order, or TRO, to provide immediate relief while the case proceeded.

Court’s Analysis

The court granted Umberger’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis. Because a person proceeding without paying filing fees must have the complaint screened under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), the court reviewed whether the action was frivolous or malicious, failed to state a claim, or sought relief from an immune defendant. The court stated that pleadings filed without a lawyer must be read liberally.

The court found that the complaint failed to state any causes of action and failed to establish subject-matter jurisdiction, meaning the court’s legal authority to hear the dispute. The complaint asserted a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and referred to alleged violations of the First, Fourth, Eighth, Fifth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments. The court found, however, that this was the entirety of the claim: the complaint did not explain the legal theory or provide the facts needed to show who did what, when, where, and how. The court also stated that the plaintiff and defendants were all California residents or entities, so the complaint did not establish jurisdiction based on citizens of different states.

Disposition

The court DISMISSED the complaint WITHOUT prejudice. It permitted Umberger to file an amended complaint addressing the failure to state causes of action and the failure to establish jurisdiction. The court stated that if no amended complaint were filed, the action would be dismissed WITH prejudice.

Because the complaint was dismissed, the court found the TRO moot, without prejudice to its being refiled at a later date. The court also directed Umberger to review the Northern District of California’s resources for finding pro bono representation.