Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Pennington v. Trustee Services of Carolina LLC

United States District Court, W.D. North Carolina, Charlotte Division

May 16, 2018

KASEEM PENNINGTON, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
TRUSTEE SERVICES OF CAROLINA, LLC, et al., Defendants.

          ORDER

          ROBERT J. CONRAD, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         THIS MATTER is before the Court on initial review of Plaintiff's pro se Complaint (Doc. No. 1) under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 and motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. No. 2). Also before the Court is Plaintiff's “Motion for an Emergency Temporary Injunction and or a Temporary Injunction and Request for Hearing via Phone.” (Doc. No. 3).

         I. IN FORMA PAUPERIS

         Federal law requires that a party instituting a civil action in federal district court pay a filing fee or be granted leave to proceed without prepayment of fees and costs. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914(a), 1915(a)(1). To establish an inability to pay, the plaintiff must submit an affidavit that includes a statement that the person is unable to pay such fees.

         According to Plaintiff's in forma pauperis (“IFP”) motion, he and his spouse have a combined average monthly income of $1, 200.00, and four minor dependents. (IFP Mot. 1, 3, Doc. No. 2). He denies any assets owned or held by himself or his spouse. He provides minimal information about his family's expenses. Nevertheless, the Court is satisfied that Plaintiff has insufficient funds to pay the filing fee. Accordingly, his IFP motion shall be granted.

         II. DISCUSSION

         A. Initial Review of Complaint

         Because Plaintiff is proceeding in forma pauperis, the Court must conduct an initial review of the Complaint to determine whether it is subject to dismissal on the grounds that it is “frivolous or malicious [or] fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). Plaintiff filed this action on April 20, 2018. (Doc. No. 1.) While the Complaint purports to be seven pages in length, the Clerk of Court received only pages 1, 3, 5, and 7. (Doc. No. 1.) Therefore, the Court is unable to determine the full nature of the claims raised or whether it has subject matter jurisdiction over this action. This prevents the Court from conducting its required initial review.

         Plaintiff shall be directed to file an amended complaint with the missing pages from his original Complaint. Plaintiff should label his document as an amended complaint. Failure to file an amended complaint shall result in dismissal of this action without further notice.

         B. Motion for Temporary Injunction

         On May 2, 2015, Plaintiff filed a motion for a temporary injunction to enjoin Defendants from enforcing a “fraudulent tax-lien foreclosure sale.” (TRO Mot. 2, Doc. No. 3). This Court may issue a preliminary injunction only on notice to the adverse party. Fed.R.Civ.P. 65(a). Plaintiff has presented no evidence that he has provided Defendants notice of his motion for an injunction. Therefore, the Court may not grant Plaintiff a preliminary injunction. See id.

         The Court may issue a temporary restraining order (“TRO”) without notice to the defendants only if:

(A) specific facts in an affidavit or a verified complaint clearly show that immediate and irreparable injury, loss, or damage will result to the movant before the adverse party can be heard in opposition; and
(B) the movant's attorney (or, here, the pro se movant) certifies in writing any efforts made to give notice and the ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.