Cassaday v. Verizon Inc.

Background

Kevin W. Cassaday filed this action without a lawyer against Verizon Inc., Yahoo!, Google, Inc., Facebook, and AT&T. The complaint alleged that, since 2018, the defendants had invaded his privacy, violated the Fourth Amendment, harassed and intimidated him, retaliated against him, engaged in racketeering, and violated federal criminal statutes. Among other allegations, Cassaday said that email communications with his deceased mother had been altered, that Verizon had removed him as an account manager, that attempts to arbitrate had been obstructed by high costs, and that AT&T had made repeated automated calls.

The court had previously allowed Cassaday to proceed without paying filing fees upfront. It reviewed the complaint under the statute governing fee-free cases, which requires dismissal of claims that are frivolous, malicious, legally insufficient, or directed at immune defendants. The court also considered its obligation to dismiss claims over which it lacks authority to decide the subject matter.

Reasons for Dismissal

The court found that the complaint lacked any arguable basis in law or fact. It characterized the allegations about communications companies and social-media networks as irrational and concluded that Cassaday had no legally recognizable theory supporting the claims. The court therefore dismissed the complaint as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i).

The court separately dismissed any claims based on federal criminal statutes. It explained that private individuals cannot initiate criminal prosecutions and that the decision whether to prosecute belongs to prosecutors. The court treated Cassaday as lacking the necessary legal basis to seek criminal prosecution of others and dismissed those claims under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(h)(3).

The court declined to give Cassaday an opportunity to amend because it found that the defects could not be corrected through amendment.

Order to Show Cause

The court stated that court records showed Cassaday had filed more than 100 cases in federal district and circuit courts around the country. It also stated that other courts had warned him that continued frivolous or duplicative litigation could lead to restrictions on future filings, and that one jurisdiction had already imposed such a restriction. The court referred to several prior related proceedings without relying on them as the disposition of this case.

The court ordered Cassaday to submit, within 30 days, a declaration explaining why he should not be barred from filing future actions in this court without paying filing fees upfront unless he first obtained the court’s permission. The court stated that if he did not submit the declaration, or if it did not show good cause, the filing restriction would be entered. The opinion did not itself state that the proposed restriction had already been entered.

Disposition

The court dismissed the action as frivolous and for failure to state a claim. It declined to grant leave to amend. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal. Judge Laura Taylor Swain signed the order.