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.

Stewart v. USA

United States District Court, W.D. Louisiana, Alexandria Division

February 2, 2015

CARL WAYNE STEWART, Plaintiff
v.
USA, et al., Defendants

SECTION " P"

Carl Wayne Stewart, heir at law on behalf of Dorothy Green Stewart, Plaintiff, Pro se, Natchitoches, LA.

For USA, Defendant: Joseph P Landreneau, LEAD ATTORNEY, U S Attorneys Office (SHV), Shreveport, LA.

For City of Natchitoches, Defendant: Ronald E Corkern, Jr, LEAD ATTORNEY, Corkern Crews & Guillet, Natchitoches, LA.

JAMES D. KIRK, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE. JUDGE DEE D. DRELL.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE

JAMES D. KIRK, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.

Before the court is a complaint filed by Carl Wayne Stewart, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 31 U.S.C. § 3729 on July 7, 2014. The named defendants are the United States of America, the USDA/FmHA, [1] the State of Louisiana, and the City of Natchitoches.

Stewart contends that he is the heir of Dorothy Green Stewart, that Dorothy Green Stewart had a contract with the USDA/FmHA, and that, on March 20, 1991, the Natchitoches Parish Sheriff, as ordered by the 10th Judicial District Court in Natchitoches Parish, Louisiana, seized and sold Dorothy Green Stewart's property at 1521 Amulet St., Natchitoches, Louisiana on behalf of the State of Louisiana and the United States Department of Agriculture (" USDA") (Doc. 1). Stewart alleges that personal property was also taken and destroyed (Doc. 1). Stewart also appears to allege that criminal proceedings were unlawfully initiated and that the federal government has been defrauded (Doc. 1).

Law and Analysis

Motion to Dismiss

A motion to dismiss an action for failure to state a claim admits the facts alleged in the complaint, but challenges plaintiff's right to relief based upon those facts. Crowe v. Henry, 43 F.3d 198, 203 (5th Cir. 1995). In particular, a complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim unless it appears beyond a doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief. Hirras v. National Railroad Passenger Corp., 10 F.3d 1142, 1144 (5th Cir. 1994), vacated on other grounds, 512 U.S. 1231, 114 S.Ct. 2732 (1994); Doe, 753 F.2d at 1102. For the purposes of a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, the factual allegations of the complaint must be taken as true, and any ambiguities must be resolved in favor of the pleader. Doe v. U.S. Dept. of Justice, 753 F.2d 1092, 1101 (D.C.Cir. 1985). It is presumed that general allegations embrace the specific facts that are necessary to support the claim. National Organization for Women, Inc. v. Scheidler, 510 U.S. 249, 114 S.Ct. 798, 803 (1994), citing Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 112 S.Ct. 2130, 2137 (1992).

United States of America & USDA/FmHA

The USA and the USDA/FmHA filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. ...


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.