Haven House for Veterans et al v. Louis Stokes Veterans Administration VA Healthcare Systems of Ohio et al
Filing
3
Memorandum Opinion and Order granting (re 2 ) Plaintiff's Motion to proceed in forma pauperis, and Plaintiff's claims for judicial review and slander are dismissed without prejudice under section 1915(e). Plaintiff 9;s damages claim for breach of contract is hereby transferred to the United States Court of Claims. 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. Signed by Judge Solomon Oliver, Jr on 10/8/2014. (D,M)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION
DONALD A. WOODRUFF,
Plaintiff
v.
LOUIS STOKES VETERANS
ADMINISTRATION VA HEALTHCARE
SYSTEMS OF OHIO, et al.,
Defendants
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No: 1:14 CV 837
JUDGE SOLOMON OLIVER, JR.
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION
AND ORDER
On April 18, 2014, plaintiff pro se Donald A. Woodruff filed this in forma pauperis action
against defendants Louis Stokes Veterans Administration VA Healthcare Systems of Ohio and the
Veterans Administration Office of Acquisitions and Materiel Management.1 While the allegations
in the complaint are unclear, plaintiff appears to state that he entered into a contract with defendants
to provide a facility and programs to assist homeless veterans.2 Services were provided by plaintiff
pursuant to the contract, but there was a sharp decline in the need for services near the end of the
first year of the contract period. Plaintiff alleges defendants at that point misinterpreted and
unilaterally modified the terms of the contract. He seeks judicial review of an adverse decision of
the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals (“CBCA”). He also asks for damages in the amount of
$47,000.00 based on theories of slander and breach of contract.
Although pro se pleadings are liberally construed, Boag v. MacDougall, 454 U.S. 364, 365
(1982) (per curiam), the district court is required to dismiss an action under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) if
1
Although the complaint also purports to be filed on behalf of Haven House for
Veterans dba the DuckeGroupe, corporations and non-incorporated organizations
cannot appear pro se in any litigation and are required to appear in court through
an attorney. Eagle Associates v. Bank of Montreal, 926 F.2d 1305, 1308 (2d Cir.
1991); Paris v. Herman, No. 99-5338, 2000 WL 571932 at *2 (6th Cir. May 3,
2000). There is no indication Mr. Woodruff is a licensed attorney.
2
Plaintiff did not include a copy of the contract in his filings with the court.
it fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, or if it lacks an arguable basis in law or
fact.3 Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319 (1989); Hill v. Lappin, 630 F.3d 468, 470 (6th Cir. 2010).
As a threshold matter, appeals seeking judicial review of CBCA decisions must be brought
in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. See, 41 U.S.C. § 7107. Further, it is
a jurisdictional prerequisite to a federal lawsuit that a claimant who seeks recovery based on tort
from the United States must first file an administrative claim under the Federal Tort Claims Act
(“FTCA”). Rogers v. United States, 675 F.2d 123, 124 (6th Cir. 1982). As there is no allegation
plaintiff presented an administrative claim to the appropriate federal agency, his slander claim is
fatally deficient. Altman v. Connally, 456 F.2d 1114, 1116 (2d Cir. 1972). Finally, plaintiff’s
contract claim for money damages against the United States is in excess of $10,000.00. Exclusive
jurisdiction therefore rests with the United States Court of Claims. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1346(a) and
1491(a); Matthews v. United States, 810 F.2d 109, 111 (6th Cir.1987).
Accordingly, the request to proceed in forma pauperis is granted, and plaintiff’s claims for
judicial review and slander are dismissed without prejudice under section 1915(e). Plaintiff’s
damages claim for breach of contract is hereby transferred to the United States Court of Claims. 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/ SOLOMON OLIVER, JR.
CHIEF JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
October 8, 2014
3
An in forma pauperis claim may be dismissed sua sponte, without prior notice to the
plaintiff and without service of process on the defendant, if the court explicitly
states that it is invoking section 1915(e) [formerly 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d)] and is
dismissing the claim for one of the reasons set forth in the statute. Chase Manhattan
Mortg. Corp. v. Smith, 507 F.3d 910, 915 (6th Cir. 2007); Gibson v. R.G. Smith Co.,
915 F.2d 260, 261 (6th Cir. 1990); Harris v. Johnson, 784 F.2d 222, 224 (6th Cir.
1986).
-2-
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?