Friedberg v. The Ortho Group

Background

Donna L. Friedeberg appeared without a lawyer and was proceeding without prepaying the filing fee. She sued The Ortho Group, which the opinion describes as a company that manufactures lawn-care products. She alleged that she bought a two-gallon container of Ortho GROUNDCLEAR to remove vegetation from her yard, followed the instructions, and initially saw no results. After several days, the vegetation died.

Friedeberg alleged that a person directed by what she called a Roman Catholic psychiatrist had come during the night and sprayed the area with Roundup. She further alleged that the Roman Catholic Church controlled The Ortho Group and hired men to spray potentially hazardous substances as part of an effort to expand the church and make it the only religion in the United States. She claimed that The Ortho Group violated her First Amendment rights by forcing or inducing her to subsidize a religion she opposed and that the company fraudulently misrepresented its product. She paid $50 for the product and asked the court to calculate damages allegedly suffered nationally by non-Roman Catholics who used it.

Court’s analysis

Because Friedeberg was proceeding without prepaying the filing fee, the court was required to dismiss the complaint if it was frivolous, malicious, failed to state a claim, sought relief from an immune defendant, or fell outside the court’s subject-matter jurisdiction. The court also explained that pleadings filed without a lawyer are read liberally, but they still must provide a short and plain statement showing an entitlement to relief.

The court held that the complaint was factually frivolous. It explained that factual frivolousness exists when allegations are clearly baseless, fanciful, fantastic, or delusional, and that a plaintiff’s beliefs are not facts without supporting factual allegations. The court found that Friedeberg provided no factual basis for her assertions about the church controlling the company or arranging the nighttime spraying. It concluded that her conclusory allegations were irrational and not plausible.

Disposition

The court dismissed the action as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). It declined to grant leave to amend because it found that the defects could not be cured by amendment. The court directed the clerk to enter judgment dismissing the action. It certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal.

The court also warned Friedeberg that if she continued to abuse the privilege of proceeding without prepaying fees by filing meritless complaints, it might require her to show why she should not be barred from proceeding without prepaying fees in that court without prior permission.