Johnson et al v. Cleveland Metropolitan School District et al, No. 1:2010cv00497 - Document 6 (N.D. Ohio 2010)
Court Description: Memorandum of Opinion and Order signed by Judge James S. Gwin on 3/9/10. As set forth herein, the Court is required to dismiss this action under 28 USC Section 1915(e) as the complaint, even liberally construed, fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The motions to proceed in forma pauperis are granted and this action is dismissed. (Related Docs. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 ). (M,G)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Johnson et al v. Cleveland Metropolitan School District et al Doc. 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO CONCERNED CITIZENS AND PARENTS OF THE CLEVELAND METROPOLITAN SCHOOL DISTRICT, et al., Plaintiffs, v. CLEVELAND METROPOLITAN SCHOOL DISTRICT, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CASE NO. 1:10 CV 497 JUDGE JAMES S. GWIN MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER On March 8, 2010, plaintiffs pro se Eric Johnson, Bonita Carter, and Sam Cooke filed this in forma pauperis action, and a Motion for Temporary Injunction, against the Cleveland Metropolitan School District, Dr. Eugene Sanders, the Cleveland Education, and Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson. Board of Plaintiffs seek relief under the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLBA), and specifically ask this court to prevent implementation of a proposed “Transformation Plan” developed for the Cleveland Metropolitan School District. 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 action under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) if it fails to state a Dockets.Justia.com 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); Lawler v. Marshall, 898 F.2d 1196 (6th Cir. 1990); Sistrunk v. City of Strongsville, 99 F.3d 194, 197 (6th Cir. 1996). Even liberally construed, the complaint does not contain allegations reasonably suggesting plaintiffs might have a valid claim. This is because there is simply no legal basis for a private cause of action under NCLBA. Newark Parents Association v. Newark Public Schools, 547 F.3d 199, 212 (3rd Cir. 2008); Fresh Start Academy v. Toledo Board of Education, 363 F.Supp.2d 910, 916 (N.D. Ohio 2005). Accordingly, the requests to proceed in forma pauperis are granted and this action is dismissed under section 1915(e). Further, 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. Dated: March 9, 2010 s/ James S. Gwin JAMES S. GWIN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 1 A 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. McGore v. Wrigglesworth, 114 F.3d 601, 608-09 (6th Cir. 1997); Spruytte v. Walters, 753 F.2d 498, 500 (6th Cir. 1985), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1054 (1986); Harris v. Johnson, 784 F.2d 222, 224 (6th Cir. 1986); Brooks v. Seiter, 779 F.2d 1177, 1179 (6th Cir. 1985). 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
