United States District Court, E.D. North Carolina, Western Division
SHARON D. LOGAN, Plaintiff,
DILLARD'S DEPARTMENT STORE OF WINSTON SALEM, Defendant. SHARON D. LOGAN, Plaintiff,
DILLARD'S DEPARTMENT STORE OF WINSTON SALEM, Defendant.
W. FLANAGAN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
matters are before the court on its own initiative to address
duplicative actions and issues raised by defendant's
motion for lack of jurisdiction and for more definite
statement (DE 19) filed in No. 5:19-CV-439 (the “439
action”). The court is in receipt of substantially
similar letters by plaintiff in support of her claims, which
the clerk has filed as a case opening document in No.
5:19-CV-169 (the “169 action”), and which
defendant has filed as a notice (DE 21) in the 439 action.
For the following reasons, the court consolidates these
matters going forward, grants defendant's motion in
conjunction with frivolity review of the action, and directs
plaintiff to file an amended complaint addressing
commenced the 169 action pro se by letter complaint without
filing fee, on April 26, 2019, asserting claims arising out
of an incident in a Dillard's Department Store in Winston
Salem, North Carolina, in which plaintiff allegedly was
apprehended for shoplifting, and received injuries, when a
“Lost Prevention” officer at the store allegedly
“beat [her] down to the floor, ” “broke
four of [her] ribs[, ] and cracked [her] knee.” (Compl.
at 1). Plaintiff does not identify a legal theory in support
of her claim, and she does not allege an amount in
controversy. According to the complaint, plaintiff currently
is incarcerated at women's prison in Raleigh, North
Carolina, and maintains a residence in Lenoir, North
response to deficiency order entered April 30, 2019,
plaintiff filed motion for leave to proceed in forma
pauperis. The court granted leave to proceed in forma
pauperis on May 21, 2019, while directing plaintiff to cure
deficiencies in the form of documents received. The court
directed the clerk to issue summonses prepared by plaintiff,
and the court directed the United States Marshal to serve the
summonses and complaint upon defendant.
entered appearance on August 9, 2019, and upon extension of
time granted, filed the instant motion to dismiss for lack of
jurisdiction and for more definite statement on September 12,
2019. Defendant filed notice in the 169 action attaching a
letter by plaintiff dated September 19, 2019, which
substantially repeats the allegations of the complaint. The
clerk of court received a letter in nearly identical terms
and docketed it as a complaint in the 439 action. The court
entered order of deficiency on October 8, 2019, in the 439
action, noting multiple deficiencies, and directing response
in 14 days.
Consolidation of 439 Action and 169 Action
that the case opening document in the 439 action and the
complaint in the 169 action raise substantially similar
allegations of fact in letter form, the court hereby
consolidates the actions. The clerk is DIRECTED to
hereinafter make all filings in the 169 action, which shall
be considered henceforth the lead case and the only active
case in the consolidated action. The 439 action is closed to
further filings, and the court VACATES its deficiency order
in the 439 action. In its place, the court provides direction
to plaintiff as set forth below for purposes of maintaining
the instant action.
Frivolity Review and Motion to Dismiss
plaintiff commenced this action without filing fee, pursuant
to an application to proceed in forma pauperis, the court
conducts frivolity review pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
1915(e)(2)(B), in conjunction with issues raised by the
instant motion to dismiss.
any filing fee, or any portion thereof, that may have been
paid, the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the
court determines that--
(B) the action or appeal--
(i) is frivolous or ...