THE STATE OF RIDGEWAY
RIDGEWAY COUNTY COURT
TRENDLUV
Plaintiff,
v.
COUNTY OF RIDGEWAY, ET. AL.
Defendant.
No. CCRC-CV-1445
Before SPENCERNIXON, County Judge
FOR THE PLAINTIFF:
Mr. TrendLUV
Plaintiff
Pro se
FOR THE DEFENDANT:
Mr. Siteowner
District Attorney
Office of the District Attorney
Mr. Conjman
Deputy District Attorney
Office of the District Attorney
ORDER AND JUDGMENT
ORDER
Defense presents a motion to dismiss the matter on Plaintiff’s alleged failure to state a
claim. Rid. R. Civ. P. 9(a)(2) provides that a pleading for relief must contain “a short
and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” The County
Appellate Court resolved a dispute over a failure to state a claim dismissal in Tomskipetski5 v.
LewisMedvedeva, et. al., (CCRC-AP-1347), to which the Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S.
544 (2007), and Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) standards (collectively the
Twombly/Iqbal or the “Twiqbal”) standards were recognized as legitimate mechanisms for
determining whether a claim should survive a dismissal.
Under the Twiqbal standard, a “complaint must contain sufficient factual matter,
accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678.
What this essentially means is that the factual matter in a complaint, when accepted as true, must
point to a probability that the defendant acted unlawfully.
Accepting all factual matter as true, Plaintiff’s employment with the District Attorney’s
Office was terminated for association with criminal organizations, where he was then dismissed
from the Parks Service and National Guard for dealing. The Law Enforcement Training Center
revoked his certificate to be a peace officer, and he was removed from his position as the County
Clerk. If the government agency sees it in their policy to terminate people who associate with
criminal organizations and deal, then the government agency has every right to do so. Beyond
that, the County Clerk serves at the pleasure of the County Executive, and therefore may depart
as the wills of the County Executive. This assumed, implicit construction of the Constitution is
one that the Supreme Court adopted with the President and his Cabinet. The founding fathers of
America may not have inscribed the mode of departure of a cabinet member into the
Constitution, but they left behind their visions in documents for how it ought to be done, to
which the Supreme Court officially recognize the President may dismiss a cabinet member as he
pleases in Myers v. United States, 272 U.S. 52 (1926).
The factual matter does not point to the probability to the Defendant committing an
unlawful act. I am thus left to determine whether the “deficiencies in the complaint” can be
remedied by an amendment to correct said deficiencies, and if so, a dismissal without prejudice
will suffice Tomskipetski5 v. LewisMedvedeva, et. al., (CCRC-AP-1347). Yet, the complaint sees
no chance of surviving an amendment.
CONCLUSION
Therefore, the matter is dismissed with prejudice.
It is so ordered,
/s/ spencernixon
County Judge
