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.

Olsen v. Olsen

United States District Court, W.D. Washington

April 26, 2017

CHRISTOPHER WILLIAM OLSEN, Plaintiff,
v.
MICHELLE OLSEN, et al., Defendants.

          ORDER

          Ronald B. Leighton United States District Judge

         THIS MATTER is before the Court on Plaintiff Olson's Motion for Leave to proceed in forma pauperis, supported by his proposed complaint. Olson is incarcerated in Walla Walla. He seeks to sue what appear to be family members and everyone who lives in a neighborhood near Lakebay, Washington, for a vast conspiracy to abuse him, repress his memories, and take his property, dating back to at least 1995.

         This list of those he claims have wronged him is long:

c. Additional Defendant(s)
Bruce & Debbi Doe Olsen, Jeffrey Ray Olsen, Sally F. Olsen, Cynthia Olsen, Beverly Olsen, Karen Olsen, John(s) & Jane(s) Doe Olsen, Palmer & Edyth Olsen-Taylor(deceased), Paul Taylor, Thomas Taylor, Jennifer Taylor, Randy Taylor, John(s) & Jane(s) Doe Taylor, Randy Munske, Erna Munske, Jack Whiteman, John Whiteman, Paul Whiteman, John(s) & Jane(s) Doe Whiteman, Tom Moore, John(s) & Jane(s) Doe Moore, Steven Seitsintr, Doe's Seitsintr, Daniel Mrosla, Doe's Mrosla, Loyd E. Miller, Doe's Miller, Tom & Shirley May, Doe's May, Ronald George, Jennifer George, Doe's George, Carl Kirchofer, Doe's Kirchofer, Donald J. &. Pearl Carroll & Doe's, Robert Robinson, Doe's Robinson, Willard Ray Causey, Doe's Causey, Eric Paffenroth, Doe's Paffenroth, Christopher Ritter, Doe's Ritter, John Stuttheim, Doe's Stuttheim, John Hinkley, Doe's Hinkley, Colleen Easterwood Trust, John Hogberg, Doe's Hogberg, Joseph Henderson, Doe's Henderson, J.W. Farms, Longbranch Learning Academy, Longbranch School, All Residences surrounding Little Palmer Lake Including but not Limited to- 3321 Whiteman Rd. KPS Lakebay, WA 98349, 2607 Whiteman RD, KPS, 2521184th/Whiteman (Large White Manse), 2313 Whiteman RD. KPS, 2212 Whiteman RD. KPS, 2011 Whiteman RD. KPS, 1621 Whiteman RD. KPS, 8963 McBrein LN., All other Homes Around Little Palmer Lake, All Owners $ Taxpayers of Pierce County Parcel Number(s) 0020101032, 0020101033, 0020101034, 0020101035, 0020101036, 0020113039, 0020113016, 0020112023, 0020112025, 0020101011, 0020101004, 0020101012, 0020103034, Residents of 160 Madrona Vista Rd. PI. Port Ludlow, WA, 161 Madrona Vista Rd. Pi., 162 Madrona Vista Rd. Pi., 163 Madrona Vista Rd. Pi., 164 Madrona Vista Rd. Pi., William Halvorson, Thomas Halvorson, Thomas SR. JR. III. Halvorson, Daine Halvorson, Edward Halvorson, Sally & Hugh Andrew, Kevin Andrew, Jordy Andrew, Shelly Andrew, Doe's Andrew, Doe's Halvorson, Madrona Vista LLC, Madrona Engineering Inc., Agasgas Inc. Madrona Inc., Rohlinger Enterprises, Kevin Olsen-Universal Management-Nevada, WA, H. Halvorson Inc., Futurewei Technologies Inc., Huawei Device USA Inc., Whiteman Tire Inc., Craig & Belinda Holdren, Chris & Andrea Holm, Central Intelligence Agency, The "Madrona Vista Boys" Tommy, Eddy, Jordy, Kevin, Levi, Eric, Michael, Chris, Marshall, Elizabeth, John(s) S Jane(s) Doe, "The Butcher"., Mr. Wei

[Dkt. #1] Olson appears to have identified at least some of these names and addresses by using Google Earth and the Pierc e County Assessors website. His claims against at least some of the defendants appear to be that they were in a position to stop other from harming him and did not.

         For example:

10 Defendant Rohlinger Enterprise is accused of employing Craig Olsen and Jose, and Negligent Supervision of its employee's. It is believed that Rohlingers is a contractor for the Department of Defense and Possibly the Central Intelligence Agency. Plaintiff alleges that Rohlingers has aided in concealing the injuries to person and property inflicted upon the plaintiff and has failed to prevent the assaults and injuries from happening when it was fully capable of preventing them. Plaintiff seeks to fully know what Rohlingers does for its business and for the court to be fully informed of what preventative measures could have been taken.

[Dkt. #1] Olson also alleges that various defendants worked with or for the CIA

25 Defendants United States Government (CIA) are accused of Negligent Supervision of its Employee's, Contractors and or Subcontractors that have used the power, training, abilities, skills, technology chemicals and influence to injure plaintiff in person, property, and liberty by commiting the assaults and sexual assaults upon the plaintiff and framing and fleecing him of his inheritence. Plaintiff knows there was a changing of the system after subsequent hacks revealing agent identification and Snowdens defection. Plaintiffs uncle came and told him that.- things were changing. . During the testing and competition to find the best "SYSTEM" for the western hemisphere the out going agent framed and fleeced the the plaintiff of his inheritence as they stole and sold everything off while going around grabbing the best looking and taking off for the next thing. The infighting within CENTCOH and CYBER COMMAND and the turn over facilitated all the thefts and larceny. Plaintiff accuses you (CIA) of failing to prevent the injuries to person, property, and liberty inflicted upon the Plaintiff. Plaintiff trys to call the defendants listed in this action including the government and no one takes his calls. Plaintiff fears his family is in danger and that something has happened to them. Plaintiff has continued beeping in his ears and fears he has. been either implanted or the system he resides in has been hijacked and he is being tortured mentally and has been tortured throughout his past. Plaintiff reached out to everyone he could try to contact before filing this complaint.

         A district court may permit indigent litigants to proceed in forma pauperis upon completion of a proper affidavit of indigency. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). The court has broad discretion in resolving the application, but “the privilege of proceeding in forma pauperis in civil actions for damages should be sparingly granted.” Weller v. Dickson, 314 F.2d 598, 600 (9th Cir. 1963), cert. denied 375 U.S. 845 (1963). Moreover, a court should “deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis at the outset if it appears from the face of the proposed [pleading] that the action is frivolous or without merit.” Tripati v. First Nat'l Bank & Trust, 821 F.2d 1368, 1369 (9th Cir. 1987) (citations omitted); see also 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). An in forma pauperis complaint is frivolous if “it ha[s] no arguable substance in law or fact.” Id. (citing Rizzo v. Dawson, 778 F.2d 527, 529 (9th Cir. 1985); Franklin v. Murphy, 745 F.2d 1221, 1228 (9th Cir. 1984).

         A pro se plaintiff's complaint is to be construed liberally, but like any other complaint it must nevertheless contain factual assertions sufficient to support a facially plausible claim for relief. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 173 L.Ed.2d 868 (2009) (citing Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007)). A claim for relief is facially plausible when “the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678.

         Olson's claims do not meet this standard, no matter how liberally his claims are construed. The claims are facially time-barred and a decades-long conspiracy of the scope he describes, involving everyone in a given neighborhood, his own entire family and the CIA is not only not plausible, it is frivolous.

         The Motion to proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED. Olson shall pay the filing fee or file a dramatically different proposed complaint within 21 days of this Order or the matter will be dismissed. Any proposed amended complaint should articulate the “who what when where ...


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.