Ogidi-Ghigbaje v. Housing

Background

Michael Ogidi-Ghigbaje proceeded without a lawyer and without paying the filing fee. He alleged that employees of Riseboro Housing recorded his voice without his consent on two occasions. According to the amended complaint, employees recorded him from outside his apartment and later recorded him when he was "yelling." He alleged that recording someone without consent is illegal in New York and sought $350 million in damages under federal and state law.

The court had previously ruled that it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction over the original complaint but allowed Michael Ogidi-Ghigbaje to file an amended complaint addressing its deficiencies. After reviewing the amended complaint, the court applied the screening rules for complaints filed without payment of the filing fee. Those rules require dismissal of claims that are frivolous, seek relief from an immune defendant, or fail to state a claim on which relief can be granted. The court also must dismiss claims over which it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction.

Federal Claim

Michael Ogidi-Ghigbaje relied on Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, including 18 U.S.C. § 2511. The court explained that this law generally prohibits intentionally intercepting an oral communication and allows an injured person to bring a civil action. But the law protects only an oral communication made with an expectation of privacy that is both subjectively and objectively reasonable.

The court held that the allegations did not show an objectively reasonable expectation of privacy. It reasoned that speech audible to a person outside the home, and communications described as yelling, are not protected oral communications under the circumstances alleged. The court therefore dismissed the federal recording allegations for failure to state a claim.

State-Law Claims

After dismissing the federal claim, the court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction, meaning its authority to hear related state-law claims in the same case. The court dismissed the state-law claims without prejudice to refiling them in state court.

Further Amendment and Disposition

The court declined to give Michael Ogidi-Ghigbaje another opportunity to amend because it concluded that the defects in the amended complaint could not be cured by further amendment. Judge Louis L. Stanton directed the clerk to enter judgment. The opinion's conclusion cites 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(11), while the screening discussion cites § 1915(e)(2)(B).