United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin
RYAN D. KRUEGER, Plaintiff,
CARRIE STAGE and AARON KRZEWINSKI, Defendants.
WILLIAM C. GRIESBACH, DISTRICT JUDGE
Ryan D. Krueger filed a complaint in this case against
Defendants Carrie Stage, the mother of his children, and her
attorney, Aaron Krzewinski, as well as a motion for leave to
proceed without prepayment of the filing fee. He relies on
the affidavit of indigence he filed in No. 19-C-1470 to
support his motion and asserts that his financial condition
has not changed since its filing on October 30, 2019. Upon
review of that affidavit, it appears that Plaintiff cannot
not afford the filing fee. Accordingly, the court will grant
Plaintiff's motion and screen the complaint.
court has a duty to review the complaint and dismiss the case
if it appears that the complaint fails to state a claim upon
which relief can be granted. See 28 U.S.C. §
1915(e)(2)(B); Hoskins v. Polestra, 320 F.3d 761,
763 (7th Cir. 2003). In screening the complaint, I must
determine whether the complaint complies with the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure and states at least plausible claims
for which relief may be granted. A complaint, or portion
thereof, should be dismissed for failure to state a claim
upon which relief may be granted if it appears beyond doubt
that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of
the claim that would entitle him to relief. Hishon v.
King & Spalding, 467 U.S. 69, 73 (1984) (citing
Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-46 (1957)).
state a cognizable claim under the federal notice pleading
system, the plaintiff is required to provide a “short
and plain statement of the claim showing that [he] is
entitled to relief.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2). The
plaintiff's statements must “give the defendant
fair notice of what the . . . claim is and the grounds upon
which it rests.” Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly,
550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007) (quoting Conley, 355 U.S.
at 47). However, a complaint that offers “labels and
conclusions” or a “formulaic recitation of the
elements of a cause of action will not do.”
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting
Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555). To state a claim, a
complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as
true, “that is plausible on its face.”
Id. (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570).
“A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff
pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the
reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the
misconduct alleged.” Id. (quoting
Twombly, 550 U.S. at 556). The complaint's
allegations “must be enough to raise a right to relief
above the speculative level.” Twombly, 550
U.S. at 555 (citations omitted). The court is obliged to give
the plaintiff's pro se allegations, however
inartfully pleaded, a liberal construction. Haines v.
Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520-21 (1972).
has now filed three actions based on allegations that
defendants violated his rights under the Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA) by preventing an ADA advocate from
representing Plaintiff at a custody hearing in Oconto County.
In this case, Plaintiff claims the mother of his children and
her attorney's arguments under Wis.Stat. § 757.30,
which prevents an individual from practicing law without a
license, resulted in the removal of Plaintiff's ADA
advocate from the custody hearing. Plaintiff asserts that
this conduct violated the ADA because, without the advocate,
he was at a disadvantage during the hearing.
cannot assert an ADA claim against Defendants because the ADA
“does not recognize a cause of action for
discrimination by private individuals.” See Baird
ex rel. Baird v. Rose, 192 F.3d 462, 471 (4th Cir. 1999)
(citing 42 U.S.C. §§ 12132, 12203(a)). In addition,
Plaintiff cannot seek relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983
because Defendants are not state actors. See West v.
Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 49 (1988) (“To state a claim
under § 1983, a plaintiff must allege the violation of a
right secured by the Constitution and laws of the United
States, and must show that the alleged deprivation was
committed by a person acting under color of state law.”
(citation omitted)). Accordingly, Plaintiff's complaint
fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, and
it will be dismissed.
IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion for
leave to proceed without prepayment of the filing fee (Dkt.
No. 3) is GRANTED.
IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's complaint is
DISMISSED. The Clerk is directed to enter
judgment accordingly. Plaintiff is warned that he may be
subject to ...