Ali Bey v. Marcoguiseppe
Filing
7
Opinion & Order signed by Judge James S. Gwin on 7/20/16. The plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis is granted and this action is dismissed in accordance with 28 U.S.C. Section 1915(e)(2)(B). The plaintiff's motions for summary judgment are denied. The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith. (Related Docs. 3 , 5 , and 6 ) (D,MA)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
------------------------------------------------------:
KING ANTWAN D. WILSON ALI BEY, :
:
Plaintiff,
:
:
vs.
:
:
DONNA L. MARCOGUISEPPE,
:
:
Defendant.
:
:
-------------------------------------------------------
CASE NO. 1:16 CV 899
OPINION & ORDER
JAMES S. GWIN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE:
Plaintiff, proceeding pro se and identifying himself as King Antwan D. Wilson Ali Bey,
has filed this in forma pauperis civil action against Donna L. Marcoguiseppe, the Clerk of the
Garfield Heights Municipal Court. In addition to a Complaint, the plaintiff has filed a Notice of
Writ of Mandamus, and motions for summary judgment (Doc. Nos. 5, 6).
The Complaint is incomprehensible and does not set forth factual allegations that are
intelligible to the Court. Nor does the Complaint set forth any coherent federal cause of action.
As best that can be discerned, the plaintiff is seeking $10 million in damages in connection with
a traffic case brought against him in Garfield Heights Municipal Court. However, the
Complaint fails to set forth discernible factual allegations regarding Clerk Marcoguiseppe.
Federal district courts are required under 28 U.S.C. §1915(e)(2)(B) to screen and dismiss
before service any in forma pauperis action the Court determines is frivolous or malicious, fails
to state a claim on which relief can be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is
immune from such relief. See Hill v. Lappin, 630 F.3d 468, 470 (6th Cir. 2010). To state a
claim, a complaint must set forth “sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to state a claim to
relief that is plausible on its face.” Id. at 470-71 (holding “that the dismissal standard
articulated in [Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009)] and [Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550
U.S. 544 (2007)] governs dismissals for failure to state a claim” under §1915(e)(2)(B)).
The Complaint must be dismissed under §1915(e)(2)(B). It does not set forth allegations
reasonably suggesting the plaintiff has any plausible federal claim against Clerk
Marcoguiseppe. See Lillard v. Shelby Cty. Bd. of Educ., 76 F.3d 716 (6th Cir. 1996) (court not
required to accept summary allegations or unwarranted legal conclusions in determining
whether a complaint states a claim for relief). In addition, judges and other court officers enjoy
absolute immunity from suit on claims arising out of the performance of judicial or
quasi-judicial functions. Foster v. Walsh, 864 F.2d 416, 417 (6th Cir. 1988), citing Pierson v.
Ray, 386 U.S. 547, 553 (1967) (judges); Denman v. Leedy, 479 F.2d 1097, 1098 (6th Cir.1973)
(municipal court clerk). Clerk Marcoguiseppe is therefore immune from a damages suit against
her arising from her official duties in connection with a traffic case.
Conclusion
Accordingly, the plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. No. 2) is granted,
and this action is dismissed in accordance with 28 U.S.C.§1915(e)(2)(B). The plaintiff’s
motions for summary judgment are denied.
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.
Dated: July 20, 2016
s/
James S. Gwin
JAMES S. GWIN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
-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?