Parker v. Stark State College

Filing 4

Memorandum Opinion and Order granting Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. # 2 ). This matter is dismissed. An appeal from this decision may not be taken in good faith. Judge John R. Adams on 1/30/17. (K,C)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION

DEBORAH A. PARKER,
Plaintiff,
v.
STARK STATE COLLEGE,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. 5:16 CV 2729
JUDGE JOHN R. ADAMS
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION
AND ORDER

On November 8, 2016, plaintiff pro se Deborah A. Parker filed this in forma pauperis
action against defendant Stark State College. Plaintiff alleges in the Complaint that she is 67
years old and disabled by mental illness. She further alleges she complained about harassment
by an instructor, sought to appeal a failing grade, was not permitted to take an exam “because
her severe mental illness from mental harassment,” her Compass Algebra scores were changed,
and that she was referred to as an “older student.” Plaintiff asserts discrimination based on
disability and age, and seeks $250,000.00 in damages.

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 it fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, or if it lacks an arguable basis

in law or fact.1 Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319 (1989); Hill v. Lappin, 630 F.3d 468, 470 (6th
Cir. 2010).

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 construing the Complaint liberally in a light most favorable to the plaintiff, Brand
v. Motley, 526 F.3d 921, 924 (6th Cir. 2008), it does not contain allegations reasonably
suggesting she might have a valid federal 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).

Accordingly, the request to proceed in forma pauperis is granted, and this action is
dismissed under section 1915(e). Further, the Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §

1

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-

1915(a)(3), that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith.

/s/ John R. Adams
JOHN R. ADAMS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
Dated: January 30, 2017

-3-