Janczuk v. United States

Background

Weronika Janczuk, who was representing herself, sued the United States and invoked federal-question jurisdiction. The court had previously granted her permission to proceed without prepaying filing fees. She stated that the events underlying her claims occurred in “all places in New York” between “2010-present,” but she left the complaint’s facts section blank.

The requested relief included orders requiring the United States to transport unhoused people to facilities, evaluate people and communities, contract with another nation or territory for the movement of people, and adopt a new “child-limit” or “child-purpose” policy concerning fertility standards. The opinion states that Janczuk did not provide a factual predicate supporting these requests.

Legal standard

When a person is allowed to proceed without prepaying fees, the court must screen the complaint and dismiss it if it is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim for relief, seeks money from a legally immune defendant, or presents claims over which the court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction. A claim is frivolous when it has no arguable legal or factual basis. Although courts read self-represented complaints generously, those complaints must still provide a short and plain statement showing an entitlement to relief.

Court’s analysis and ruling

The court concluded that Janczuk had pleaded no facts supporting her requested relief and that no apparent legal theory connected those requests to a viable claim. Even after reading the complaint generously, the court found that it reached the level of irrationality and therefore dismissed the action as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i).

Courts generally give a self-represented plaintiff an opportunity to amend a defective complaint, but the court determined that amendment would be futile here. It therefore declined to grant leave to amend and dismissed the action as frivolous.

Litigation history and warning

The court stated that Janczuk had filed 20 other cases in the court during the previous two months, many of which also named the United States. The court warned that continued filing of actions determined to be frivolous or without merit could lead to an order requiring her to explain why she should not be barred from filing new civil actions without prepaying fees unless she first obtained the court’s permission.

Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without prepaying fees for purposes of an appeal. The court directed the clerk to enter judgment.