Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Everett v. United States

United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, Western Division

July 16, 2019

Verlean Everett, Plaintiff,
v.
United States of America, et al., Defendants.

          ORDER

          James G. Carr, Sr. U.S. District Judge

         In this pro se action, plaintiff Verlean Everett brings claims against the United States of America, J.C. Penney Company (“J.C. Penney”), and the State of Ohio for “pendant cases, religion discrimination, forgery, ERISA pension violation, criminal nagligence [sic], and race gender bias.” (Doc. 1).

         J.C. Penney and the United States have filed motions to dismiss. (Doc. 3, Doc. 9). For the reasons that follow, I grant those unopposed motions. I also dismiss, sua sponte, the claims against the State of Ohio.

         Discussion

         I. Res Judicata Bars Everett's Claims Against J.C. Penney

         Everett's complaint first raises claims arising out of her former employment with J.C. Penney. She alleges that J.C. Penney 1) discriminated against her by terminating her after she refused to sign a J.C. Penney policy that she alleges interfered with her religious beliefs, 2) forged her signature on the policy, and 3) committed ERISA violations.

         J.C. Penney argues that res judicata bars Everett's claims. I agree.

         Everett has already filed and lost a lawsuit against J.C. Penney in this district. In that case, she asserted, as she does here, claims for religious discrimination, forgery, and ERISA violations in connection with her prior employment. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's decision, and the United States Supreme Court denied Everett's petition for a writ of certiorari. See Doc. No. 3-1; Verlean E. Macon v. J.C. Penney Company, No. 3:12-CV-2826 (N.D. Ohio Apr. 14, 2014) (Helmick, J.), aff'd, No. 14-3454 (6th Cir. Dec. 29, 2014), cert. denied, No. 14-946, 135 S.Ct. 1844 (Mem) (Apr. 20, 2015).[1] Everett asks me to reverse these decisions. (Doc. 1 at 27).

         “A final judgment on the merits of an action precludes the parties or their privies from relitigating issues that were or could have been raised in that action.” Federated Dep't Stores, Inc. v. Moitie, 452 U.S. 394, 398 (1981); see also Rivet v. Regions Bank, 522 U.S. 470, 476 (1998). Because Everett already litigated her claims against J.C. Penney, res judicata bars her from reraising those claims here.

         I therefore grant J.C. Penney's motion to dismiss.

         II. Everett's Claims Against the United States Fail

         Everett's allegations against the United States are unclear. It appears, however, that those allegations relate to how a police officer responded to an automobile accident and subsequent litigation arising out of that accident.[2]

         I dismiss Everett's claims against the United States for several reasons.

         A. Everett's Allegations About the Police Officer's Conduct Fail to State a Claim ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.