Opinion
Case No. 16-12599 Adv. No. 16-1062
12-14-2016
IN RE: PEGGY J. WEST, Debtor TINA GATLIFF, Plaintiff v. PEGGY J. WEST, Defendant
Chapter 7
DECISION OF THE COURT GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM [Docket Number 4]
This Court has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 157(a) and 1334, and the standing General Order of Reference in this District. This matter is before this Court on the Notice of Motion and Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim Upon Which Relief Can Be Granted (the "Motion") [Docket Number 4] filed by Defendant-Debtor Peggy J. West (the "Debtor"). Plaintiff Tina Gatliff (the "Plaintiff") did not respond to the Motion and the matter is ripe for review.
In the Motion, Debtor asserts that the complaint filed by the Plaintiff does not state a claim for relief. Even if the Plaintiff's facts are taken as true, asserts the Debtor, the complaint fails to provide a legal basis to except the debt owed to the Plaintiff from discharge. Based on the reasoning provided below, this Court agrees with the Debtor and dismisses the Plaintiff's complaint.
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
For purposes of the Motion, this Court takes the facts stated in the Plaintiff's Adversary Complaint (the "Complaint") [Docket Number 1] as true. In the Complaint, Plaintiff states that she was awarded a judgment of $3,000.00 against the Debtor in the Hamilton County Municipal Court [Docket Number 1]. The judgment was a result of a car accident on May 26, 2015 caused by the Debtor allowing "her adult daughter to operate her vehicle knowingly without car insurance." [Id.]. The daughter was on her cell phone causing the accident to occur [Id.]. While the Debtor said she had car insurance, she refused to give it to the Plaintiff and instead said she would give it to the Mt. Healthy police department [Id.]. Debtor did not follow through and the Plaintiff believes that the Debtor did not actually have the vehicle insured [Id.]. The damage to the Plaintiff's vehicle totaled $3,382 but the Plaintiff was awarded only $3,000 "due to it being small claims court" [Id.].
The Plaintiff is on a fixed income and has children with learning disabilities and her attempts to collect from the Debtor have caused her an extreme amount of stress [Id.]. The Plaintiff requests that the debt owed to her by the Debtor be excluded from discharge in the Debtor's bankruptcy case [Id.].
II. LEGAL ANALSYIS
A. Legal Standard
A motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure ("Rule") 12(b)(6), for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, challenges the legal sufficiency of a complaint. In determining a motion to dismiss, the court must "construe the complaint in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, accept its allegations as true, and draw all reasonable inferences in favor of the plaintiff." Jones v. City of Cincinnati, 521 F.3d 555, 559 (6th Cir. 2008) (quoting Directv, Inc. v. Treesh, 487 F.3d 471, 476 (6th Cir. 2007)). However, in determining such a motion, a court "need not accept as true legal conclusions or unwarranted factual inferences." Id.
Because a defendant is entitled to fair notice of what the plaintiff's claim is and the grounds upon which it rests, the plaintiff's factual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level. Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007). Consequently, to survive the filing of a motion to dismiss, the complaint "must contain either direct or inferential allegations respecting all the material elements to sustain a recovery under some viable legal theory." Varljen v. Cleveland Gear Co., Inc., 250 F.3d 426, 429 (6th Cir. 2001).
B. Plaintiff's Complaint Fails to State a Claim
In the Motion, the Debtor asserts that the Plaintiff's Complaint should be dismissed pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) because it fails to provide a legal basis to hold the judgment for damages caused by the accident nondischargeable in the Debtor's bankruptcy case. Upon review of the Complaint, this Court agrees. The Plaintiff's Complaint cites no legal basis for holding the debt nondischargeable nor do the facts as they are stated in the Complaint fall clearly within one of the statutory exceptions to discharge provided in 11 U.S.C. § 523(a). While the Plaintiff may have provided more detail through an amendment to the Complaint and/or response to the Debtor's Motion, Plaintiff did not amend or respond. As such, this Court is left with no choice but to dismiss the Complaint.
III. CONCLUSION
For the reasons stated above, this Court GRANTS Defendant-Debtor Peggy J. West's Motion to Dismiss [Docket Number 4]. The Adversary Complaint [Docket Number 1] is DISMISSED.
SO ORDERED.
This document has been electronically entered in the records of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Ohio.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/ _________
Beth A. Buchanan
United States Bankruptcy Judge Dated: December 14, 2016 cc: Peggy J West
2885 Huston Rd
Cincinnati, OH 45251 Tina Gatliff
911 Sunset Ave
Cincinnati, OH 45205 Steven R Roell
Law Offices of Arnold S. Levine
324 Reading Road
Cincinnati, OH 45202
Email: srroell@aol.com