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.

Conerly v. Wolf

United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Indianapolis Division

October 27, 2017

DETRICK CURTIS CONERLY, MICHAEL AARON BONNER, JOHN MENO CRUZ, Plaintiffs,
v.
TOM WOLF, MS. KATHLEEN KANE, PARAN LLP, Defendants.

          ENTRY DISMISSING MISCELLANEOUS CASE AND DIRECTING ENTRY OF FINAL JUDGMENT

          TANYA WALTON PRATT, JUDGE

         For the reasons explained below, this miscellaneous action to register a foreign judgment is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. In the absence of jurisdiction there is nothing to do but announce this fact and close the case. Accordingly all pending motions are denied as moot.

         Background

         Plaintiffs Detrick Curtis Conerly, Michael Aaron Bonner, and John Meno Cruz (collectively “Plaintiffs”) are Idaho state prisoners. They seek to register a foreign judgment purportedly issued by the Court of Common Pleas of Westmoreland County, Pennsylvania, against Defendants Tom Wolf, Ms. Kathleen Kane and Paran LLP. Plaintiffs seek to obtain “full faith and credit” for the Westmoreland County Judgment in this Court. Plaintiffs state that “[t]he reason for the registration is because there is an absence of assets in the rendering county court. It is believed that Paran LLP may have some assets in the Southern District of Indiana.” (Dkt. 1 at page 2.)

         This Court has not been able to identify a certified copy of the judgment in the blizzard of papers the plaintiffs have submitted. The plaintiffs have submitted a document captioned for the Court of Common Pleas of Westmoreland County, Pennsylvania which reads:

         (Image Omitted)

See Dkt. 1-5 at ¶ 12. In addition, the Plaintiffs have submitted a subsequent Order of Court which reflects that on October 31, 2016, the Plaintiffs decided that they only wished to pursue this action against Paran LLP and that there was no objection to dismissing Tom Wolf and Kathleen Kane from the state case as defendants. However, no amended judgment issued by the state court was submitted.

         If these documents are pieced together, it appears that the plaintiffs have filed this action in the hopes of enforcing a judgment against Paran LLP in the amount of $138.00. Defendant Paran LLP allegedly has its headquarters at 2127 S. Helen Street Boise, Idaho, 83705. Dkt. 6-1 at p. 8. It also has a last known address of Paran LLP, 536 Franklin St. 1F, Reading PA, 19602. Dkt. 12 at p. 5.

         The plaintiffs' intentions, however, go beyond a $138.00 debt. Instead they state that the judgment also includes a statement that they are “sovereign, ” such that “no one can obtain subject matter jurisdiction over John Meno Cru[z], Michael Aaron Bonner, and Detrick Curtis Conerly without their expressed consent. Anyone who restricts his liberty will be charged twenty five thousand dollars U.S. (lawful money) for every twenty three minutes of restriction of liberty in any form.” See dkt. 6 at p. 2. No such language in a state court issued judgment was identified. In addition, the theory that the plaintiffs' custodians could be liable for the plaintiffs continued incarceration based on a Pennsylvania state court judgment against Paran LLP is unclear.

         In any event, the Entry of September 11, 2017, instructed Plaintiffs that “to obtain the registration of a foreign judgment sought by the plaintiffs, they must show that the underlying claim is one over which a federal court would have jurisdiction.” GE Betz, Inc. v. Zee Co., 718 F.3d 615, 624-25 (7th Cir. 2013). The Plaintiffs were given a period of time in which to identify the basis on which this federal court would have jurisdiction over the cause of action asserted in their complaint brought in Bonner, et al., v. PARAN LLP, et al., No. 4329 JU 2016 in the Court of Common Pleas of Westmoreland County, Pennsylvania. What followed was more than 600 pages of documentation that included various assertions of fact or law. Those papers reflect that the underlying state court action was frivolous and include the following assertions.

         1. The papers reflect an attempt to change the defendant from PARAN LLP to the State of Idaho and its counties. See e.g., Dkt. 13.

         2. There is a motion to join Michael Griffith because he “has a similar judgment from the Court of Common Pleas Westmoreland County PA that states that he is sovereign and not a person” and “his liberty is also being restricted by the Defendant(s).” Dkt. 8 at 2.

         3. There is a request for emergency hearing based on the fact that the statutes the plaintiffs were convicted under use the term “person.” Dkt. 9 at 3.

         4. The plaintiffs suggest that jurisdiction is proper because criminal judgments have been issued against them. Dkt. 12 ...


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.