Adacia v. Bishop William A. Cosgrove Center
1:25-cv-01336
| N.D. Ohio | Jul 29, 2025Background
- Plaintiff, acting pro se, filed claims against several public and private entities in Cleveland, Ohio, including public officials and organizations.
- Allegations include denial of court access, due process violations, malicious prosecution, and various intentional torts, accompanied by unusual and highly implausible factual assertions involving police and officials.
- The plaintiff has filed at least ten similar lawsuits against the City of Cleveland and Cuyahoga County in a short period.
- Plaintiff has been issued no trespass orders by local government after repeated, disruptive visits to request public records.
- The complaint includes broad and incoherent allegations of official conspiracies to harm and terrorize the plaintiff.
- The court permitted the plaintiff to proceed in forma pauperis but reviewed the complaint under the screening standard for frivolous or implausible filings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of federal civil rights claims | Plaintiff claims officials conspired to deny his rights | Claims are incoherent, implausible | Dismissed—complaint is fantastical, no plausible claim |
| Application to proceed in forma pauperis | Entitled due to financial situation | N/A | Granted |
| State law tort claims | Defendants targeted plaintiff with various tortious acts | Allegations are irrational | Dismissed—no viable legal basis under state law |
| Potential for good faith appeal | Plaintiff may seek to appeal | N/A | Certified no good faith basis for appeal |
Key Cases Cited
- Boag v. MacDougall, 454 U.S. 364 (per curiam) (standard for liberal construction of pro se pleadings)
- Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519 (liberal construction of pro se complaints)
- Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319 (frivolous or delusional claims may be dismissed, even if in forma pauperis)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (pleading standard for plausible claims)
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (standard for plausibility in complaint allegations)
- Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25 (trial courts need not accept clearly baseless factual allegations)