United States District Court, E.D. North Carolina, Eastern Division
ORDER AND MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION
E. Gates United States Magistrate Judge
pro se case is before the court on the application to proceed
in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1)
(D.E. 1) by plaintiff Christopher Dolin
(“plaintiff”) and for a frivolity review pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). These matters were
referred to the undersigned magistrate judge pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) and (B), respectively.
See D.E. dated 4 Apr. 2019. Plaintiff also filed a
motion for partial summary judgment, which has been referred
to the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B).
See D.E. dated 11 June 2019.
ON MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS
court finds that plaintiff has adequately demonstrated his
inability to prepay the required court costs. It is therefore
ORDERED that plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma
pauperis is ALLOWED.
found that plaintiff is financially eligible to proceed
in forma pauperis, the court must now undertake a
frivolity review of this case, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
1915(e)(2)(B). See Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25,
27 (1992) (standard for frivolousness). Based on this review
and for the reasons stated below, it will be ordered that
this litigation proceed against one defendant.
commenced this action arising under the court's diversity
jurisdiction on 4 April 2019. Compl. (D.E. 1-1), Civ. Cover
Sheet (D.E. 1-2). His proposed complaint appears to assert
claims pursuant to North Carolina state law, although he does
not specify his claims by name. See generally Compl.
liberally, as it must be, see Denton, 504 U.S. at
32; White v. White, 886 F.2d 721, 722-23 (4th Cir.
1989), the proposed complaint alleges as follows:
Plaintiff's spouse was employed at Riverside Regional
Jail Authority (“Riverside”). Id. §
III. Defendant Jordan Kindred (“Kindred”) was an
officer at Riverside who sexually harassed plaintiff's
spouse and pursued a dating and sexual relationship with her.
Id. §§ I.B., III. On or about 28 April
2018, Kindred's actions towards plaintiff's spouse
resulted in plaintiff leaving the marital residence.
Id. §§ II.B.3, III. On 1 September 2018,
plaintiff's spouse ended the relationship with Kindred,
but Kindred continued to sexually harass her, which included
touching, verbal comments, and stalking. Id.§
III. Defendants Karen Craig (“Craig”), Jeffery
Newton (“Newton”), and Walter Minton
(“Minton”) allowed and openly accepted the sexual
harassment by Kindred to be present in the workplace.
Id.§ III.B.3. Plaintiff, a citizen of North
Carolina, alleges that all defendants are citizens of the
state of Virginia. Id. §§ II.B.1, B.2.
seeks damages for emotional distress, expenses incurred in
maintaining separate households, and costs. Id.
§§ III.B.3, IV.
Applicable Legal Standards
allowing a party to proceed in forma pauperis, as
here, the court must conduct a frivolity review of the case
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). The court must
dismiss the complaint if it determines that the action is
frivolous or malicious, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i);
fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted,
Id. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii); or seeks monetary