Herndon v. Supreme Power of the Law
- Charles Breyer
- 3:23-cv-01117
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 1
In Herndon v. Supreme Power of the Law, Judge Breyer dismissed the Section 1983 case without prejudice after Herndon failed to amend.
Gerrod L. Herndon and Supreme Power of the Law; the action was dismissed without prejudice and the case was closed.
What happened
Gerrod L. Herndon, representing himself, sued Supreme Power of the Law under a federal civil-rights law. His complaint said he needed his case heard in court but gave no facts describing wrongdoing or connecting the defendant to wrongdoing.
The court had given Herndon 28 days to file an amended complaint showing that a state official caused a violation of a federal right. He did not file an amended complaint or request more time. The court dismissed the action without prejudice and closed the case.
Judge Charles R. Breyer issued the dismissal on June 16, 2023. The dismissal was based on Herndon’s failure to amend after the court explained what facts his complaint needed to include.
The detailed version
- Herndon v. Supreme Power of the Law · No. 3:23-cv-01117
- Charles Breyer
- June 16, 2023
Background
Gerrod L. Herndon, a former state prisoner currently living at All Saints Extended Care, filed a complaint without a lawyer under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law that allows claims for violations of federal rights by state actors. He alleged that he needed to have his case heard in a courtroom with him present. He named “Supreme Power of the Law” as the defendant; the complaint suggested that the defendant might be a clergy pastor. The complaint did not provide facts describing wrongdoing or connecting the defendant, or any other possible defendant, to wrongdoing.
Earlier Court Order
On May 16, 2023, the court dismissed the complaint with leave to amend. The court told Herndon that he had to allege specific facts showing how a state actor caused the deprivation of a federal right and that conclusory allegations—unsupported statements without supporting facts—were insufficient. The court gave him 28 days to file a proper amended complaint and warned that failing to do so would result in dismissal.
Ruling
More than 28 days passed, and Herndon neither filed an amended complaint nor requested an extension of time. The court therefore dismissed the action without prejudice and instructed the clerk to close the case. Judge Charles R. Breyer signed the order.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.