Higgins v. State of New Hampshire

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
John Higgins
v. 	Case No. 23-cv-114-SM
State of New Hampshire
Report and Recommendation
John Higgins, who is proceeding pro se and in forma
pauperis, filed a claim against the State of New Hampshire on a
form complaint. He alleges only “Automobile Liability Insurance
Negligence.” He states that he is requesting relief in the
amount of 19 million dollars. Doc. no. 2 at 2. The complaint was
referred for preliminary review. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B); LR
4.3(d)(1).
Standard of Review
Pursuant to this court’s authority to subject complaints
filed in forma pauperis to preliminary review, the court may
dismiss claims sua sponte if the court lacks subject matter
jurisdiction, a defendant is immune from the relief sought, the
complaint fails to state a claim, or the action is frivolous or
malicious. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2); LR 4.3(d)(1). In
determining whether a pro se pleading states a claim, the court
must construe the pleading liberally. See Erickson v. Pardus,
551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007) (per curiam). To determine whether to
Case 1:23-cv-00114-SM Document 3 Filed 03/14/23 Page 1 of 4

2
dismiss claims for failure to state a claim, the court takes as
true the factual content in the complaint and inferences
reasonably drawn from those facts, strips away the legal
conclusions, and considers whether the plaintiff has stated a
claim for relief that is plausible on its face. Hernandez-Cuevas
v. Taylor, 723 F.3d 91, 102-03 (1st Cir. 2013) (citing Ashcroft
v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009)).
Discussion
Higgins provides no factual allegations to support his
claim of negligence against the State of New Hampshire. Rule
8(a)(2) requires that a complaint contain “a short and plain
statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to
relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). The court is authorized to
dismiss a complaint that lacks “a short and plain statement” as
required under Rule 8(a)(2). Kuehl v. FDIC, 8 F.3d 905, 908 (1st
Cir. 1993).
In addition, Higgins seeks money damages, in the amount of
19 million dollars, from the State of New Hampshire. The
Eleventh Amendment protects states, including state agencies and
state officials sued in their official capacities, from suits
seeking money damages. See Will v. Mich. Dep’t of State Police,
491 U.S. 58, 71 (1989); Sinapi v. R.I. Bd. of Bar Examiners, 910
Case 1:23-cv-00114-SM Document 3 Filed 03/14/23 Page 2 of 4

3
F.3d 544, 553 (1st Cir. 2018). Because Higgins brings suit
against the State of New Hampshire for money damages, his
complaint is barred by the Eleventh Amendment.
As filed, Higgins’s complaint does not invoke the
jurisdiction of the court, name defendants that are amenable to
suit, or provide any allegations about what happened that caused
him to file the complaint. More specifically, the complaint does
not allege who did what to whom. In the absence of that
information, the complaint does not survive preliminary review.
Conclusion
For the foregoing reasons, the district judge should
dismiss the complaint (document no. 2) for failure to state a
claim on which relief may be granted.
Any objections to this Report and Recommendation must be
filed within fourteen days of receipt of this notice. See Fed.
R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). 	The fourteen-day period may be extended
upon motion. 	Only those issues raised in the objection to this
Report and Recommendation are subject to review in the district
court. See Sch. Union No. 37 v. United Natl Ins. Co., 617 F.3d
554, 564 (1st Cir. 2010). Any issues not preserved by such
objection(s) are precluded on appeal. 	See id. 	Failure to file
any objections within the specified time waives the right to
Case 1:23-cv-00114-SM Document 3 Filed 03/14/23 Page 3 of 4

4
appeal the district court's order. 	See Santos-Santos v. Torres-
Centeno, 842 F.3d 163, 168 (1st Cir. 2016).
______________________________
Andrea K. Johnstone
United States Magistrate Judge
March 14, 2023
cc: 	John Higgins, pro se
Case 1:23-cv-00114-SM Document 3 Filed 03/14/23 Page 4 of 4