Want more wrestling news, rumors, and results? Be sure to visit PWInsider.com and PWInsiderXtra.com.
A strange lawsuit that was filed this past June against Vince McMahon and WWE before the United States District Court of The Western District of Pennsylvania by a Dana W. Wiley, who is currently incarcerated in the State of Pennsylvania was recommended for dismissal on 12/13, PWInsider.com has learned.
The lawsuit, which was handwritten, claims that McMahon breached an agreement for Wiley to become a WWE employee with a $70,000 per month salary. It also claimed that WWE and McMahon allegedly committed "breach of contract and failure to reimbursed a $5,500 "down payment hangout, what app email contract to personal fan meet World Wrestling Entertainment employee Alexia (sic) Bliss."
In the lawsuit, Wiley alleged McMahon discriminated against him after "Plaintiff was arrested and charge (sic) for attempted homicide, aggravate (sic) assault against New Castle, Pennsylvania Law Enforcement on 10/22/22 order the United States Secret Service and Pennsylvania State Police Troop, D. major case team to possess a warrant to unlawful seized Search I, Plaintiff phone device and property in conspiracy theory plot to obstruct and destroy any evidence supporting these facts that World Wrestling Entertainment employee Alexia (sic) Bliss email text to I, Plaintiff hangout, what app email business accounts."
In a filing dated 12/13, United States Magistrate Judge Patricia L. Dodge stated:
"Plaintiff’s allegations are both incredible and improbable. Plaintiff is currently incarcerated at SCI Forest. While he claims to have an enforceable contract with Defendant, he does not state when the purported contract at issue was made. Moreover, any claim that he was offered an employment contract for $70,000 per month is implausible whether or not he was incarcerated when a contract with Defendant was allegedly formed. Given Plaintiff’s criminal background, a matter of public record and of which the Court takes judicial notice , any suggestion that he would be paid at a yearly salary of $840,000 is far-fetched at best.
The terms of the rest of the alleged contract are, simply put, indecipherable. It is impossible to determine the nature of a contract described as a “hangout, what app email contract” to meet Alexia Bliss, a WWE employee. Further, while not identified as a separate claim, any assertion that the CEO of WWE conspired to have Plaintiff arrested for attempted homicide and aggravated assault in New Castle, Pennsylvania in order to destroy evidence about the purported contract is patently frivolous.
The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that “the federal courts are without power to entertain claims otherwise within their jurisdiction if they are ‘so attenuated and unsubstantial as to be absolutely devoid of merit’; ‘wholly insubstantial’; ‘obviously frivolous’; ‘plainly unsubstantial’; or ‘no longer open to discussion.’”
Even if Plaintiff’s claims were not frivolous, they are still subject to dismissal. First, although Plaintiff appears to rely on the Copyright Act and the Lanham Act as the basis for subject matter jurisdiction, he does not identify any copyright or trademark at issue or state a claim under either statute. Similarly, while he also references the Fifth Amendment as a basis for subject matter jurisdiction, he does not assert any facts that could support a Fifth Amendment claim. As a review of the Complaint demonstrates, he is asserting a breach of contract claim only, and as stated in his conclusion, is seeking damages only for breach of contract.
Thus, there is no federal question that has been asserted here, and therefore, no basis for subject matter jurisdiction based on 28 U.S.C. § 1331. Nor does the Complaint plead any facts that suggest that diversity of citizenship exists as Defendant’s state of residence is not identified. Absent Plaintiff’s implausible allegation about a promise of a $70,000 per month employment contract, the only amount in dispute is $5,500. This does not meet the $75,000 threshold required for jurisdiction under 28 U.S. C. § 1332. Consequently, there is no basis for subject matter jurisdiction of Plaintiff’s breach of contract claim, even if a plausible, intelligible, and rational one had been pleaded. For all of these reasons, Plaintiff’s Complaint should be dismissed."
Wiley, who was sentenced to a five to twenty-year prison term for armed robbery on May 1, 1995, was seeking $6 million for breach of contract as well as the reimbursement of all legal fees. The suit has not yet been officially dismissed but all signs are that is the direction this is taking.
Wiley previously attempted to sue Vince McMahon as well as members of DX and the NWO, claiming that he had signed a fair use contract for the trademarks of those groups back in 1995 on the steps of a courthouse in New Castle, PA after he was sentenced "in an unrelated criminal case" but was ignored for over 20 years and not paid. That lawsuit was later dismissed.
If you enjoy PWInsider.com you can check out the AD-FREE PWInsider Elite section, which features exclusive audio updates, news, our critically acclaimed podcasts, interviews and more by clicking here!
Bang On Casino
