Bey v. Cash Money Records
| Elidion Aristide Bey |
| Cash Money Records |
| 1:2021cv21732 |
| May 5, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Florida |
| K Michael Moore |
| Other Fraud |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 27, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 5
PAPERLESS ORDER. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon a sua sponte examination of the record. On May 26, 2021, pro se Plaintiff filed a Notice wherein he requests that the court reopen his case. #4 . Similar to the disjointed nature of his initial Complaint #1 , which the Court dismissed for multiple reasons on May 7, 2021 3 , Plaintiff makes vague allegations discussing social media threats, computer hacking, and possibly identity theft. See generally id. However, Plaintiff again fails to (1) comply with even the most basic pleading requirements, (2) assert a basis for the Court to assert jurisdiction, and (3) state a cognizable legal basis for entitlement to relief. See generally id. Further, Plaintiff has again failed to pay the Clerk's filing fee or move to proceed in forma pauperis. UPON CONSIDERATION of the pertinent portions of the record and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that this matter shall remain CLOSED. Signed by Chief Judge K. Michael Moore on 5/27/2021. (hwr)
|
| Filing 4 NOTICE/REQUEST to reopen case by Elidion Aristide Bey re 3 Order Dismissing Case. (lk) |
|
Filing 3
PAPERLESS ORDER. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon a sua sponte examination of the record. On May 5, 2021, Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed a Complaint naming Cash Money Records as Defendant in this action. #1 . Plaintiff has neither paid the Clerk's filing fee nor moved to proceed in forma pauperis. The Complaint states that it is filed "In The United States Supreme Court For Connecticut Republic," invokes jurisdiction under "The Zodiac Constitution," indicates that venue lies in the United States Supreme Court, and cites "The Treaty of Peace and Friendship of 1836 A.D.," presumably as legal authority in this matter. See generally id. "Pro se pleadings are held to a less stringent standard than pleadings drafted by attorneys and will, therefore, be liberally construed." See Rodriguez v. Scott, 775 F. Appx 599, 602 (11th Cir. 2019) (quoting Tannenbaum v. United States, 148 F.3d 1262, 1263 (11th Cir. 1998) (internal quotation marks omitted)). When read liberally, a pro se pleading "should be interpreted 'to raise the strongest arguments that [it] suggest[s].'" Graham v. Henderson, 89 F.3d 75, 79 (2d Cir. 1996) (quoting Burgos v. Hopkins, 14 F.3d 787, 790 (2d Cir. 1994)). However, a district court is not required to "rewrite an otherwise deficient pleading in order to sustain an action." Rodriguez, 794 F. App'x at 603 (quoting Campbell v. Air Jamaica Ltd., 760 F.3d 1165, 1169 (11th Cir. 2014) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). Moreover, a district court "should not abandon its neutral role and begin creating arguments for a party, even an unrepresented one." Sims v. Hastings, 375 F. Supp. 2d 715, 718 (N.D. Ill. 2005) (citing Anderson v. Hardman, 241 F.3d 544, 545 (7th Cir. 2001)). Pro se litigants, like all litigants, must comply with procedural rules, including the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules for the Southern District of Florida. Here, Plaintiff's Complaint includes a disjointed narrative in which Plaintiff alleges that he faces "an existing threat from a rival gang who pose as a rap group," the gang hacked Plaintiff's tablet and profited off of music taken from it, the gang opened a bank account in Plaintiff's name, Plaintiff was once kidnapped by a member of the gang, and "the gang has been sending hostel [sic] threats of human trafficking towards [Plaintiff] if [he does not] shut up about the situation." See #1 at 5. Plaintiff's Complaint is deficient in several respects. First, the Complaint fails to satisfy the pleading requirements set forth in Rules 8(a) and 10 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a), 10. Second, Plaintiff erroneously asserts jurisdiction under "The Zodiac Constitution." Third, Plaintiff cites no cognizable legal basis for an entitlement to relief. Thus, the Court must dismiss the Complaint. UPON CONSIDERATION of the Complaint #1 , the pertinent portions of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Plaintiff's Complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Plaintiff may, if he so chooses, file an Amended Complaint that complies with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure within twenty-one (21) days of the date of this Order. In so doing, Plaintiff must also pay the Clerk's filing fee of $402.00 or move to proceed in forma pauperis. The Clerk of Court is INSTRUCTED to (1) administratively CLOSE this case, and (2) mail Plaintiff a copy of this Order along with the form complaint. All pending motions, if any, are DENIED AS MOOT. Signed by Chief Judge K. Michael Moore on 5/7/2021. (hwr)
|
| Filing 2 Clerks Notice of Judge Assignment to Chief Judge K. Michael Moore. Pursuant to 28 USC 636(c), the parties are hereby notified that the U.S. Magistrate Judge Lauren F. Louis is available to handle any or all proceedings in this case. If agreed, parties should complete and file the Consent form found on our website. It is not necessary to file a document indicating lack of consent. Pro se (NON-PRISONER) litigants may receive Notices of Electronic Filings (NEFS) via email after filing a Consent by Pro Se Litigant (NON-PRISONER) to Receive Notices of Electronic Filing. The consent form is available under the forms section of our website. (jbs) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Cash Money Records. Filing fees $ 402.00, No IFP was Filed or Filing Fee Paid, filed by Elidion Aristide Bey.(jbs) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Florida Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Bey v. Cash Money Records | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: Cash Money Records | |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Elidion Aristide Bey | |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
