Transcript Staff Writer

OKLAHOMA CITY --A Granite man's lawsuit against more than 40 defendants, including the Cleveland County Board of Commissioners, District Judge Tom Lucas, District Attorney Greg Mashburn, Sheriff DeWayne Beggs and a host of others has been dismissed by a federal district judge.

John Murray, 45, of Granite, claimed a loss of income, real estate losses, health problems resulting in surgery and "emotional, physical, mental and domestic distress," in his lawsuit. Murray said the group's actions "threatened his future and freedom, denied his civil rights and caused a general loss in quality of life."

Murray's claims stem from a July 4, 2006, incident.

In his suit, Murray said three women -- Demea Guidice, Donna Guidice and Cathey Miller -- initiated a campaign of harassment against Murray, "claiming dominion over the private road known as Running Deer Road."

That harassment continued, Murray said, "when Demea Guidice made a complaint to Cleveland County Sheriff's Department which resulted in Murray's arrest and incarceration."

Murray sought $30 million in damages and an "end to the pattern of harassment and persecution" along with "all remedies allowed by law including real and punitive damages, interest, cost, medical bills and other related expenses."

Murray filed the suit pro se -- meaning he represented himself in the proceeding without an attorney.

Dave Batton, assistant district attorney for Cleveland County, said Murray's suit was originally dismissed at the state court level.

"He had his original suit dismissed in state court," Batton said. "Then he turned around and filed in federal court."

On several occasions, Batton said, he tried to speak with Murray, but Murray was "hard to get focused on what his problems are."

Batton said Murray faces a trial for assault and battery in Cleveland County.

In her ruling, Federal District Judge Robin Cauthron dismissed Murray's complaint, saying none of Murray's allegations "would support a plausible federal or constitutional claim for relief against these defendants."

"It's patently obvious that Plaintiff could not prevail on the facts he has alleged," Cauthron wrote. "Amendment would be futile and these claims shall be dismissed."

Murray, Cauthron said, "fails to include any discernible allegations regarding any federal claim against as-yet-unknown defendants, and therefore dismissal of these defendants is proper."