Domas v. Wilder

NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION.
UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL
AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.

IN THE
ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS
DIVISION ONE

HARRY P. DOMAS, Plaintiff/Appellant,

v.

WILLIAM H. WILDER, Defendant/Appellee.

No. 1 CA-CV 19-0728
FILED 6-30-2020

Appeal from the Superior Court in Apache County
No. S0100CV201900130
The Honorable D. Steve Williams, Judge, Pro Tempore, Retired

AFFIRMED

COUNSEL

Harry P. Domas, Concho
Plaintiff/Appellant

William H. Wilder, Concho
Defendant/Appellee

DOMAS v. WILDER
Decision of the Court

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Judge Jennifer M. Perkins delivered the decision of the Court, in which
Presiding Judge David D. Weinzweig and Judge James B. Morse Jr. joined.

P E R K I N S, Judge:

¶1 Harry P. Domas appeals from the trial court’s dismissal of his
complaint for failure to state a claim. We affirm.

¶2 In July 2019, Domas filed a civil complaint against William H.
Wilder alleging violations of A.R.S. section 13-2703 (state criminal false
swearing) and 18 U.S.C. section 1621 (federal criminal perjury). Wilder filed
a motion to dismiss for improper service and, in the alternative, failure to
state a claim. The trial court granted the motion to dismiss, finding Domas
failed to state a claim on which relief could be granted.

¶3 We review a trial court’s grant of a motion to dismiss for
failure to state a claim de novo. Conklin v. Medtronic, Inc., 245 Ariz. 501, 504
¶ 7 (2018).

¶4 The trial court dismissed Domas’s complaint because he cited
state and federal criminal statutes as the basis for his civil complaint against
Wilder. Domas does not cite any legal authority—and we are aware of
none—granting him a private right to enforce state and federal criminal
statutes against other private individuals. We affirm the trial court’s ruling.

AMY M. WOOD • Clerk of the Court
FILED: AA

2