Grasso v. Grasso

Filing 10

Memorandum of Opinion and Order For the reasons stated in the Order, Plaintiff's Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. # 2 ) is granted. this action is dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). 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 Dan Aaron Polster on 9/15/2017. (K,K)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION

ROBERT GRASSO,
Plaintiff,
vs.
GARY GRASSO,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. 1:17 CV 1637
JUDGE DAN AARON POLSTER

MEMORANDUM OF OPINION
AND ORDER

Pro se Plaintiff Robert Grasso filed this action against Gary Grasso. The Complaint (Doc. #
1) contains no facts and no legal claims. It is composed entirely of a demand for damages and other
relief. Plaintiff also filed an Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. # 2). That Application
is granted.
Although pro se pleadings are liberally construed, Boag v. MacDougall, 454 U.S. 364, 365
(1982) (per curiam); Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972), the district court is required to
dismiss an in forma pauperis action under 28 U.S.C. §1915(e) if it fails to state a claim upon which
relief can be granted, or if it lacks an arguable basis in law or fact. Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319
(1989); Lawler v. Marshall, 898 F.2d 1196 (6th Cir. 1990); Sistrunk v. City of Strongsville, 99
F.3d 194, 197 (6th Cir. 1996). An action has no arguable basis in law when a Defendant is immune
from suit or when a Plaintiff claims a violation of a legal interest which clearly does not exist. Neitzke,

490 U.S. at 327. An action has no arguable factual basis when the allegations are delusional or rise to
the level of the irrational or “wholly incredible.” Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 32 (1992);
Lawler, 898 F.2d at 1199.
A cause of action fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted when it lacks
“plausibility in the complaint.” Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 564 (2007). A pleading
must contain a “short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.”
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 677-78 (2009). The factual allegations in the pleading must be
sufficient to raise the right to relief above the speculative level on the assumption that all the allegations
in the Complaint are true. Bell Atl. Corp., 550 U.S. at 555. The Plaintiff is not required to include
detailed factual allegations, but must provide more than “an unadorned,
the-defendant-unlawfully-harmed-me accusation.” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678. A pleading that offers legal
conclusions or a simple recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not meet this pleading
standard. Id. In reviewing a Complaint, the Court must construe the pleading in the light most
favorable to the Plaintiff. Bibbo v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc., 151 F.3d 559, 561 (6th Cir.1998).
At a minimum, the Complaint must give the Defendants fair notice of what the Plaintiff’s claims
are and the grounds upon which they rest. Bassett v. National Collegiate Athletic Ass’n, 528 F.3d
426, 437 (6th Cir. 2008). District Courts are not required to conjure up questions never squarely
presented to them or to construct full blown claims from sentence fragments. Beaudett v. City of
Hampton, 775 F.2d 1274, 1278 (4th Cir. 1985). To do so would “require ...[the Courts] to explore
exhaustively all potential claims of a pro se Plaintiff, ... [and] would...transform the District Court from

-2-

its legitimate advisory role to the improper role of an advocate seeking out the strongest arguments and
most successful strategies for a party.” Id. at 1278. Plaintiff’s Complaint contains no factual
allegations and no legal claims. It does not meet the basic pleading requirements of Federal Civil
Procedure Rule 8.
Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. # 2) is granted. this
action is DISMISSED pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). 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.1
IT IS SO ORDERED.

9/15/2017
DAN AARON POLSTER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

1

28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) provides:
An appeal may not be taken in forma pauperis if the trial court certifies that it is not taken
in good faith.
-3-