Moshir v. New York Legal Assistance Group

Background

Al Moshir, who was proceeding without a lawyer, sued the New York Legal Assistance Group (NYLAG) and other defendants whom he did not identify. The court had previously allowed him to proceed without prepaying filing fees. Moshir used the court’s general complaint form and invoked federal-question jurisdiction. His allegations consisted largely of handwritten scribbles in the margins. The court could identify references to events at the Thurgood Marshall courthouse on July 28, 2023, but found the remainder of the complaint largely illegible and unintelligible, including the requested relief.

Failure to State a Claim

The court applied the screening requirement for complaints filed without prepaying fees under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). It explained that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8 requires a complaint to provide a short and plain statement giving each defendant fair notice of the claim and the grounds for it.

The court concluded that Moshir did not allege sufficient facts about what NYLAG or any other defendant did to violate his rights. The complaint did not explain what happened, how the defendants allegedly violated his rights, or what relief he sought. Because the court could not discern a plausible legal claim, it dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted.

Subject-Matter Jurisdiction

The court also addressed federal subject-matter jurisdiction, meaning the court’s legal authority to hear the case. It explained that federal-question jurisdiction requires a claim arising under the Constitution, federal laws, or treaties. Merely invoking federal jurisdiction is not enough. The court instructed Moshir that an amended complaint must identify the federal statutory or constitutional basis for his claims and allege facts supporting a federal cause of action.

The court also discussed diversity jurisdiction, which generally requires citizens of different states and an amount in controversy exceeding $75,000. The complaint stated that Moshir resided in New York State but did not allege the citizenship of the defendants. The court stated that NYLAG was also a citizen of New York, which defeated diversity jurisdiction on the allegations then before the court.

Leave to Amend and Disposition

Because Moshir was representing himself and it was unclear whether he could allege a viable claim, the court granted him 60 days’ leave to file an amended complaint. The amended complaint must replace, rather than supplement, the original complaint. It must provide an intelligible statement of the facts, identify each defendant and what that defendant did or failed to do, describe relevant dates and locations, describe injuries, state the requested relief, and establish subject-matter jurisdiction.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim and granted Moshir 60 days’ leave to amend. The court ordered that no summons issue at that time. It stated that if Moshir did not timely amend and could not show good cause, the Clerk would be directed to enter judgment consistent with the order. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without prepaying fees for an appeal.