United States District Court, D. Montana, Missoula Division
MICHAEL T. ANDERSON, Plaintiff,
MICHAEL McGRATH, in his official capacity as Chief Justice of the Montana Supreme Court of the State of Montana, and MICHAEL W. COTTER, in his official capacity as Chief Disciplinary Counsel for the State of Montana, Defendants.
ORDER, AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION
Jeremiah C. Lynch United States Magistrate Judge.
In Forma Pauperis Application
Michael Anderson, appearing pro se, filed an application
requesting leave to proceed in forma pauperis. He submitted a
declaration that makes the showing required by 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(a). Because it appears he lacks sufficient funds
to prosecute this action IT IS HEREBY
ORDERED that Anderson's application is
GRANTED. This action may proceed without
prepayment of the filing fee, and the Clerk of Court is
directed to file Anderson's lodged Complaint as of the
filing date of his request to proceed in forma pauperis.
federal statute under which leave to proceed in forma
pauperis is permitted - 28 U.S.C. § 1915 - also requires
the Court to conduct a preliminary screening of the
allegations set forth in the litigant's pleading. The
applicable provisions of section 1915(e)(2) state as follows:
Notwithstanding 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-
(A) the allegation of poverty is untrue; or
(B) the action or appeal-
(i) is frivolous or malicious;
(ii) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted;
(iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune
from such relief.
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).
Court will review Anderson's pleading to consider whether
this action can survive dismissal under the provisions of
section 1915(e)(2), or any other provision of law. See
Huftile v. Miccio-Fonseca, 410 F.3d 1136, 1138, 1142
(9th Cir. 2005).
April 16, 2018, Plaintiff Michael Anderson mailed a letter to
Defendant Michael Cotter, the Chief Disciplinary Counsel in
the Montana Office of Disciplinary Counsel, requesting the
production of certain documents. Specifically, Anderson
requested that Cotter provide him with copies of the
“public records” of the attorney disbarment
proceedings pertaining to a specific Montana attorney, Robert
Myers. (Doc. 2-6 at 4 of 11.)
states the Office of Disciplinary Counsel had pursued a
grievance against Robert Meyers for alleged professional
misconduct, and it presented the matter to the Montana
Commission on Practice. As a result, the Commission on
Practice recommended that Myers be disbarred, and the Montana
Supreme Court adopted the recommendation. Thus, Anderson also
names the Chief Justice of the Montana Supreme Court, the
Honorable Michael McGrath, as a Defendant.
asserts he needs the documents he is requesting from
Defendants to support a petition he intends to file
“with either the Special Procedures Unit/Special
Rapporteur[s] of the U.N. Human Rights Council and/or the
Inter-American Commission on Human Rights”. (Doc. 2 at
22.) His petition will present his theory that United States
citizens do not receive fair trials in either civil or
criminal cases prosecuted in any court or tribunal in the
United States. Anderson states his theory is based, in part,
upon his own 20 years of experience with litigation in
American courts ruing which he allegedly he has not received
fair hearings. He contends the United States government is
responsible for ensuring that citizens receive fair trials,
but it has failed to satisfy its duty in that regard.
Anderson seeks to rectify the problem through his proposed
believes his theory of injustice in the United States will be
supported by the records of Myers' disbarment
proceedings. He contends Myers did not receive fair hearings
in his disciplinary matters, and Anderson argues ...