Frost v. City of New York

Background

Yvonne Frost sued City of New York (HRA), alleging that the defendants violated her rights. The court had granted Frost permission to proceed without paying the filing fee. Frost used the court’s general complaint form. Her allegations, as quoted in the order, concerned statements she heard or was shown and a dispute involving houses, prices, ownership, and money.

Legal standard

When a person proceeds without paying the filing fee, the court must screen the complaint. It must dismiss the complaint if it is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim for relief, seeks money from a legally immune defendant, or if the court lacks authority to hear the case. A claim is frivolous when it has no arguable factual or legal basis. The court also must read a self-represented person’s filing liberally and interpret it to raise the strongest claims reasonably suggested by the filing.

Court’s analysis

The court held that Frost’s claims were irrational even when read with the special consideration given to self-represented filings. It further held that there was no legal theory on which Frost could rely. The court therefore dismissed the action as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i).

Courts generally give a self-represented plaintiff an opportunity to amend a defective complaint. Here, however, the court found that the defects could not be cured by amendment and declined to grant leave to amend.

Disposition

The court dismissed Frost’s complaint as frivolous. It also certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Frost permission to proceed without paying the filing fee for purposes of an appeal. The opinion states that Frost had filed this action before the court issued orders in two earlier related proceedings requiring her to show cause why she should not be barred from filing additional fee-free actions without prior permission.