Roigk v. Germany

Background

Peter Heinz Kamillo Roigk represented himself and asked to proceed without prepaying filing fees. He invoked the court’s federal-question jurisdiction and alleged that the defendants violated rights involving “property, health, [and] privacy.” He sought $10 billion in damages.

The complaint’s caption named “Germany (FRG) And See Attachment ‘Defendants 1.’” The attachment appeared to identify Germany, Postbank/Deutsche Bank, Siemens, GEMA, and “Pro7Sat1 Media SE” as defendants. It also suggested that Roigk might be suing Georg Bumiller, Dieter Jaeckel, Andreas Nickl, and members of the Community of Heirs of Kamillo Otto Eduard Roigk, except Peter Roigk. The attachment stated that other companies, including GMX and AVM, might be named later.

Roigk alleged, among other things, that German authorities and private companies had harmed him, that money was missing from his Postbank/Deutsche Bank account, and that the bank refused to pay a small amount from another account. He also made allegations involving surveillance, weapons, injuries, forced prostitution, abuse of minors, slavery, and other crimes. After filing the complaint, he submitted six additional letters that the court described as similar in style and substance.

Legal standard

Because Roigk was proceeding without prepaying filing fees, the court was required to dismiss the complaint if it was frivolous, malicious, failed to state a claim for relief, sought money from an immune defendant, or presented claims over which the court had no subject-matter jurisdiction. The court also explained that it must read a self-represented person’s complaint generously, but the complaint still must provide a short and plain statement showing an entitlement to relief.

A complaint is factually frivolous when its allegations are clearly baseless, irrational, or wholly incredible. A plaintiff’s beliefs are not facts, and a complaint must provide a factual basis for claims based on information and belief.

Court’s analysis

The court found that the complaint was difficult to understand and did not clearly identify whom Roigk intended to sue. It also found that Roigk supplied no plausible factual support for his assertions that he had been the victim of a conspiracy involving German police, elected officials, and international corporations. In the court’s view, the complaint presented a confusing narrative of beliefs and suspicions rather than factual allegations supporting a legal claim.

The court concluded that the allegations were conclusory, irrational, and frivolous under the statute governing complaints filed without prepaying filing fees. It declined to give Roigk an opportunity to amend because the complaint did not suggest that additional facts could cure the lack of factual support.

Disposition

Judge Louis L. Stanton dismissed the action as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), declined to grant leave to amend, and directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment. The opinion does not state that the dismissal was with or without prejudice.