McCright v. I.R.S.

Background

Colvin McCright, a California state prisoner proceeding without a lawyer, brought a civil action against a governmental entity. He had permission to proceed without paying the filing fee. He sought court intervention to obtain an economic impact payment under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, commonly called the CARES Act.

McCright asked the court to reopen the earlier related class action, Scholl, and to require the Internal Revenue Service to provide his economic impact payments. The opinion states that McCright was incarcerated and was part of the Scholl class.

Screening standard

Because McCright was a prisoner suing a governmental entity, the court screened the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. That screening requires dismissal of claims that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim for relief, or seek money from a defendant protected from such relief. The court also applied the rule requiring a complaint to provide enough factual information to give the defendant fair notice and show a plausible entitlement to relief.

Court’s analysis

The earlier related proceeding held that the CARES Act did not allow the government to withhold economic impact payments solely because a person was or had been incarcerated. It also held that the Internal Revenue Service’s policy treating people incarcerated at any time in 2020 as ineligible was unlawful. But that proceeding did not decide whether any particular incarcerated person was actually owed a payment or the amount of any payment. It left those individual determinations to the Internal Revenue Service.

The court ruled that, to the extent McCright claimed his payment was denied because of his incarceration, he was already covered by the Scholl class and was not entitled to separate individual relief. An individual request for equitable relief may be dismissed when it duplicates the allegations and requested relief in an existing class action. The opinion stated that class members must pursue additional action through the class representative and attorney, including contempt proceedings or intervention in the class action.

The court separately ruled that McCright could not obtain an order reopening the earlier case or compelling payment under the Scholl decision or the CARES Act. The CARES Act required payments or credits to be made or allowed by December 31, 2020. The court concluded that the deadline had passed and that no more funds could be issued under the Act.

Disposition

The court concluded that McCright failed to state a claim for relief. It dismissed the complaint without leave to amend because it found that no amendment could cure the identified defects. The action was dismissed without leave to amend, the pending motion at Docket No. 1 was denied, and the clerk was ordered to close the case.