Miller v. Coleman Professional Services, et al., No. 5:2019cv02832 - Document 4 (N.D. Ohio 2020)

Court Description: Memorandum Opinion and Order dismissing this matter for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction pursuant to the Court's authority established in Apple v. Glenn. The Court further certifies that an appeal from this decision could not be taken in good faith. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). The motion to proceed in forma pauperis is denied (Doc. # 2 ). Judge John R. Adams on 3/26/20. (K,C)

Download PDF
Miller v. Coleman Professional Services, et al. Doc. 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO Chadwick L. Miller, Plaintiff, v. Coleman Professional Services, et al. Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CASE NO. 5: 19 CV 2832 JUDGE JOHN R. ADAMS MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER Pro se Plaintiff Chadwick L. Miller has filed a complaint in this action against the Coleman Professional Services and the Jackson Police Department. (Doc. No. 1.) He has filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. No. 2.) That motion is denied. Plaintiff has abused the privilege of proceeding in forma pauperis and is now barred from proceeding in forma pauperis. See Miller v. Holmes Cty. Sheriff Department, No. 5: 20 CV 225 (N.D. Ohio Mar. 23, 2020); Miller v. Mt. Eaton Police Department, No. 5: 19 CV 2618 (N.D. Ohio Mr. 23, 2020). Further, there is no reason to allow Plaintiff the opportunity to proceed with this case by paying the filing fee, as his complaint on its face is “totally implausible, attenuated, unsubstantial, frivolous, [and] devoid of merit” and therefore subject to dismissal for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction under Apple v. Glenn, 183 F.3d 477, 479 (6th Cir. 1999). Accordingly, this action is dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction pursuant to the Court’s authority established in Apple v. Glenn. The Court further certifies that an appeal from this Dockets.Justia.com decision could not be taken in good faith. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). IT IS SO ORDERED. Date: March 26, 2020 /s/ John R. Adams JOHN R. ADAMS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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.