Miller v. CMHA Police Department

Filing 3

Memorandum Opinion and Order dismissing this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915A. The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(a)(3), that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith, re 1 Complaint filed by Monroe Miller. Judge Christopher A. Boyko on 3/1/2012. (M,M)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

MONROE MILLER,
Plaintiff,
v.
CMHA POLICE DEPARTMENT,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. 1:12 CV 005
JUDGE CHRISTOPHER A. BOYKO

MEMORANDUM OF OPINION
AND ORDER

On January 3, 2012, pro se Plaintiff Monroe Miller, an inmate at the Northcoast Correctional
Treatment Facility, filed the above captioned action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the Cleveland
Metropolitan Housing Authority Police Department. Plaintiff alleges that agents of Defendant used
excessive force against him, causing injuries that required medical treatment. For the reasons stated
below, this action must be dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.
A district court is expressly required to dismiss any civil action filed by a prisoner seeking
relief from a governmental officer or entity, as soon as possible after docketing, if the court
concludes that the complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or if the
plaintiff seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. §1915A;
Siller v. Dean, No. 99-5323, 2000 WL 145167 , at *2 (6th Cir. Feb. 1, 2000).

It is well established that section 1983 will not support a claim based upon a theory of
respondeat superior alone. Polk County v. Dodson, 454 U.S. 312, 325 (1981). Government entities
may be deemed liable for the unconstitutional actions of their agents only when those actions are
the result of official policies or customs. Monell v. Dept. of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658 (1978).
As the Complaint contains no suggestion that a policy or custom of Defendant resulted in the
deprivation of Plaintiff’s federally protected rights, this case is appropriately subject to dismissal
for failure to state a claim. Elliott v. U.S. Dept. Of Housing and Urban Develpment, 43 Fed.Appx.
795, 797 (6th Cir. 2002).
Accordingly, this action is dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1915A. The Court certifies,
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good
faith.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

S/Christopher A. Boyko
CHRISTOPHER A. BOYKO
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

March 1, 2012

-2-