Clemens v. Katz, L-08-1274 (3-20-2009)Clemens v. Katz, L-08-1274 (3-20-2009)
{¶ 2} In July 2007, appellant, Jeffrey L. Clemens, filed a 34 page complaint against ten defendants, including federal court agents and appellee, Jane S. Randall, alleging various claims related to a previous criminal case in federal court. Randall represented appellant in probation violation proceedings.
{¶ 3} All defendants, with the exception of Randall, were dismissed from the suit. Randall filed a
{¶ 4} Pursuant to 6th Dist. Loc.
{¶ 5}
{¶ 6} On appeal, the standard of review for a
{¶ 7} Under the notice pleading requirements of
{¶ 8} Under Ohio common law, "false imprisonment occurs when a person confines another intentionally `without lawful privilege and against his consent within a limited area for any appreciable time, however short.'"Bennett v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. Corr. (1991),
{¶ 9} Our review of the record and the pleadings reveals that at the time related to appellant's claims against Randall, he had been taken into custody pursuant to an alleged probation violation pertaining to a federal case. Appellant's complaint provided 34 pages of "facts" and descriptions of the events leading up to his lawsuit. Some of the facts alleged indicate that appellant disagreed with or did not like the outcome of appellee's actions as his attorney. No facts, however, indicate that Randall was responsible for appellant being taken into custody. Contrary to appellant's suggestion, a request for a continuance while representing a client does not constitute support for a claim of false imprisonment.
{¶ 10} Appellant's complaint contains many naked legal conclusions, without operative facts to support or relate to his claims. Consequently, the complaint simply did not meet even minimal notice pleading requirements. Therefore, the trial court properly granted appellee's
{¶ 11} In addition, since appellant's brief has failed to set forth any argument in support of his other six assignments of error, and based upon our review of the record, we conclude that the trial court properly granted appellee's
{¶ 12} Accordingly, appellant's assignments of error one through seven are not well-taken.
{¶ 13} The judgment of the Lucas County Court of Common Pleas is affirmed. Appellant is ordered to pay the costs of this appeal pursuant to
JUDGMENT AFFIRMED.
A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to
Peter M. Handwork, J., Mark L. Pietrykowski, J., Arlene Singer, J., CONCUR. *1