Peric v. Cuyahoga County Ohio et al

Filing 6

Memorandum Opinion and Order. The Complaint does not contain allegations reasonably suggesting plaintiff might have a valid claim, nor does it set forth a claim over which this court might arguably have subject matter jurisdiction. The Court f inds this case is therefore appropriately subject to summary dismissal. Accordingly, this action is dismissed. 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 12/6/2017. (R,Sh)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION

ANTE PERIC, Pro Se,
Plaintiff
v.
CUYAHOGA COUNTY, et al.,
Defendants

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 1:17 CV 2343
JUDGE SOLOMON OLIVER, JR.

MEMORANDUM OF OPINION
AND ORDER

Pro se plaintiff Ante Peric brings this civil rights action against defendants Cuyahoga
County, the City of Strongsville, Joy Peric, Anna Parise, and the City of Strongsville Prosecutor.
The statement of claim portion of the Complaint states in its entirety as follows:
Prosecutor failed to produce the contract therefore lacks standing to pursue
prosecution against Ante Peric. Marbury v. Madison, 5 US 137 (1803).
A cause of action fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted when it lacks
“plausibility in the complaint.” Bell At. 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. Twombly, 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 (2009).
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.

Even liberally construed, the Complaint does not contain allegations reasonably
suggesting plaintiff might have a valid claim, see, Lillard v. Shelby County Bd. of Educ,, 76
F.3d 716 (6th Cir. 1996)(court not required to accept summary allegations or unwarranted legal
conclusions in determining whether complaint states a claim for relief), nor does it set forth a
claim over which this court might arguably have subject matter jurisdiction. The Court finds
this case is therefore appropriately subject to summary dismissal. See, Apple v. Glenn, 183
F.3d 477, 479 (6th Cir. 1999).
Accordingly, this action is dismissed. 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.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

December 6, 2017

-2-