Klein v. Koenig

Background

Benjamin Klein brought this lawsuit without a lawyer against Shlomo Koenig, identified in the caption as “SECRET POLICE CHIEF (aka MODESTY SQUAD),” and other defendants. He alleged that the defendants violated his constitutional rights. The filing fees had been paid.

The court explained that it could dismiss a complaint for frivolousness, lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, or failure to state a legally sufficient claim. It also explained that complaints filed without a lawyer are read liberally, but still must provide a short and plain statement showing why the plaintiff is entitled to relief and must include enough facts to make the claims plausible.

Rulings

The court concluded that Klein’s 19-page complaint did not comply with the short-and-plain-statement requirement because, despite the information it contained, the court could not understand what claims Klein was trying to assert. The court therefore dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim.

Racketeering claim. Klein asserted a civil claim under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, or RICO. The court held that the claim failed because Klein did not allege that the defendants acted as an enterprise or engaged in racketeering activity. The court also stated that the claims appeared possibly untimely and noted that many defendants were private parties. The court dismissed the RICO claims for failure to state a claim. It further stated that Klein could not initiate or direct a criminal prosecution against the defendants because prosecuting decisions belong to prosecutors.

Constitutional-rights claims. The court treated Klein’s constitutional-rights allegations as claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Such a claim requires allegations that a constitutional or federal legal right was violated by someone acting under state law. The court held that Klein did not state a § 1983 claim against the listed private defendants because they did not work for a state or other government body.

Leave to amend and disposition

The court granted Klein leave to file an amended complaint within 30 days of the order. The amended complaint must be captioned “Amended Complaint,” use docket number 20-CV-9319 (PMH), and be submitted to the court’s Pro Se Intake Unit. It must provide a short and plain statement of the facts supporting each claim against each defendant, including the defendants’ names and titles, what each defendant did or failed to do, when and where the events occurred, how the conduct violated Klein’s rights, his injuries, and the relief he seeks. Any claims or facts Klein wants to maintain must be included because the amended complaint will replace the original complaint.

The court stated that if Klein did not file an amended complaint within the allowed time and did not show good cause for failing to do so, it would enter a civil judgment consistent with the order and direct the Clerk to terminate the matter. The court’s order dismissed the complaint and granted 30 days’ leave to file an amended complaint.