Turner v. Eli Lily Company

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 || TERRANCE TURNER, Case No.: 23-CV-1722-JO-DDL 12 Plaintiff, 13 || Vv. ORDER: (1) DISMISSING uycompany.eraL, | COMPLAINT FURSUANT □□□ 15 Defendants. 1915; and (2) DENYING MOTION 16 FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS 17 18 19 20 On September 14, 2023, Terrance Turner (“Turner”) filed a lawsuit and a motion to 21 || proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) on behalf of another individual, Day Spencer. On behalf 22 || of Spencer, Turner alleges that doctors administered a dangerous drug to Spencer’s child. 23 || Dkt. 1 at 4-6. Although Turner filed this case as the plaintiff, he was not involved in the 24 || facts of the case, and he did not suffer the injuries alleged in the complaint. See generally 25 Nor is Turner a licensed attorney. For the reasons stated below, the Court DISMISSES 26 Turner’s complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 with prejudice and DENIES his motion to 27 || proceed IFP as moot. 28 1 I. SCREENING UNDER 28 U.S.C. § 1915 2 A complaint filed pursuant to the IFP provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) is subject tc 3 ||a mandatory and sua sponte review by the Court. Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1127 4 Cir. 2000). The Court must dismiss the complaint if it is frivolous, malicious, fails tc 5 || state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendan 6 ||immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). To pass screening, all complaint: 7 |{must contain a “short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitlec 8 ||to relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). “The standard for determining whether a plaintiff ha: 9 || failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted under § 1915(e)(2)(B) is the same 10 the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) standard for failure to state <« 11 ||claim.” Watison v. Carter, 668 F.3d 1108, 1112 (9th Cir. 2012); see also Barren v 12 || Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir. 1998) (noting that “[t]he language of § 13 |11915(e)(2)(B)Gi) parallels the language of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 14 12(b)(6).”). Rule 12(b)(6) requires that a complaint “contain sufficient factual matter 15 || accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal 16 ||556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (internal quotation marks omitted). Detailed factual allegation: 17 ||are not required, but “[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supportec 18 || by mere conclusory statements, do not suffice.” Jd. at 678. 19 Upon screening, the Court finds that Plaintiff's claims fail as a matter of law □□□□□□□ 20 ||/Turner did not suffer the injuries alleged in his complaint. A plaintiff only has lega 21 |/standing to sue when they have suffered harm from the defendant’s alleged wrongfu 22 |\conduct. Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560 (1992). Specifically, in order 23 have standing, a party must establish that: (1) it suffered an “injury in fact;” (2) there i: 24 causal connection between the injury and the allegedly wrongful conduct; and (3) the 25 injury would likely be redressed by a favorable decision. /d. at 560-61. Because standings 26 a jurisdictional requirement, courts should sua sponte examine whether plaintiffs have 27 |\met their burden of establishing standing. Bernhardt v. Cnty. of Los Angeles, 279 F.3¢ 28 1 |} 862, 868 (9th Cir. 2002); Lujan, 504 U.S. at 561 (“[T]he party invoking federal jurisdiction 2 || has the burden of establishing [standing].”). 3 Here, Turner’s complaint rests entirely on events that occurred to someone other 4 himself. Turner alleges that an individual named Day Spencer suffered harm because 5 ||a pharmaceutical company marketed a dangerous prescription drug to doctors, and doctors 6 || subsequently used this medication in treating Spencer’s child. Dkt. 1 at 2-6. A review of 7 ||the complaint and the accompanying IFP motion reveals that Turner had no relationship 8 || with Day Spencer and her child, and that he was not involved in the facts alleged in this 9 See generally Dkt. 1. Instead, it appears that Turner is representing Day Spencer in 10 || this lawsuit for financial remuneration, despite the fact that he is not a licensed attorney. 11 says as much in his IFP request, noting that he is “hustling legal services at a modicum 12 just to pay the rent.” Dkt. 2 at 2. His court filings indicate no bar number! or 13 || affiliation with a law office. Because Turner is not the one who suffered the injury, he 14 || does not have standing to pursue this action. See Warth v. Seldin, 422 U.S. 490, 502 (1975) 15 || (“Petitioners must allege and show that they personally have been injured, not that injury 16 ||has been suffered by other, unidentified members . . . which they purport to represent.”). 17 || Moreover, it appears that Turner is engaged in the unlicensed practice of law. Accordingly, 18 || the Court dismisses the complaint pursuant to § 1915(e). 19 Il. CONCLUSION 20 Because amendment could not cure the fact that Turner is not the individual who 21 || suffered the injury in this case, the Court DISMISSES this complaint pursuant to 28 22 ||U.S.C. § 1915 with prejudice. Chaset v. Fleer/Skybox Int’l, LP, 300 F.3d 1083, 1088 (9th 23 || Cir. 2002) (stating that dismissal with prejudice is warranted where amendment would be 24 || futile because the flaws in the claims cannot be cured). The Court also DENIES his 25 ||motion to proceed IFP as moot because it has dismissed Turner’s case with prejudice. 26 27 28 l Because Turner listed a Virginia address in the Complaint, the Court ran its own search of both the Virginia and California Bar websites and found no record of an attorney named Terrance Turner.

1 || (This dismissal with prejudice applies only to the complaint filed by Turner; it does not 2 || foreclose Day Spencer and/or her child from refiling this action in their own right either 3 || pro se or represented by a licensed attorney.) The Clerk is directed to close this case. 4 Moreover, as it appears that Turner is engaged in the unlicensed practice of law, 5 ||the Court orders the Clerk to report this matter and send a copy of this order to both the 6 || California State Bar and the Virginia State Bar. 7 | SO ORDERED. 8 9 ||Dated: October 16, 2023 10 □ i Ho orgbfe Tinsook Ohta 12 United States District Judge 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28