Calvino v. Baez
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:19-cv-11955
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Calvino v. Baez, Judge McMahon dismissed three complaints as frivolous after screening Ernest Calvino, Jr.’s filings.
Ernest Calvino, Jr. and the defendants named in the three actions: Willie Cevalloz, Joel Cevalloz, Bill Miller, Tom Ray, Audrea H., Jose D. Baez, and “Jose D. Baez N.”
What happened
Calvino v. Baez involved three complaints filed by Ernest Calvino, Jr. without a lawyer against private individuals. He alleged spying, threats, harassment, defamation, false accusations, lost wages, stress, and problems involving property and valuables.
The court reviewed the complaints under the federal rules governing cases filed without advance payment of fees. It concluded that the allegations were irrational and that no legal theory supported them. The court also found that the problems could not be fixed by changing the complaints.
Judge Colleen McMahon dismissed all three complaints as frivolous and declined to allow amendments. She also ruled that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for an appeal.
The detailed version
- Calvino v. Baez · No. 1:19-cv-11955
- Colleen McMahon
- Jan. 10, 2020
Background
Ernest Calvino, Jr. filed three actions without a lawyer. The court had granted his requests to proceed without paying filing fees in advance on January 6, 2020.
In docket number 1:19-CV-11911, Calvino sued Willie Cevalloz and Joel Cevalloz. He alleged that they were spying on him anonymously, threatening him, lying to him, and trying to intimidate him electronically.
In docket number 1:19-CV-11952, Calvino sued Bill Miller, Tom Ray, and Audrea H. He alleged that the defendants claimed to be helping him, sought information that could be used against him, and that Audrea H. tried to accuse him of money laundering and damage his reputation. He identified injuries including damage to his personal image, stress, lost meals, institutional neglect, lost wages, and emotional damage, and sought the return of property and valuables.
In docket number 1:19-CV-11955, Calvino sued Jose D. Baez and “Jose D. Baez N.” He alleged harm involving support, failure to transfer something, and the return of valuables and property. He identified lost wages, stress, and being misled as injuries.
Legal standard
Because Calvino was proceeding without a lawyer and without paying filing fees in advance, the court was required to screen the complaints. Under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B) and 1915A(b), the court must dismiss a complaint that is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim for relief, or seeks money from a defendant who is legally immune from that relief. The court also had to read the filings liberally and interpret them to present the strongest claims they reasonably suggested.
The court explained that a claim is frivolous when it has no arguable basis in law or fact. It stated that factual allegations are frivolous when they are irrational or wholly incredible, and that a legal claim is frivolous when it rests on an indisputably meritless legal theory.
Court’s analysis
The court concluded that, even when read with the special consideration given to filings from people without lawyers, Calvino’s claims were irrational and had no legal theory supporting them. The court determined that the defects could not be corrected by amendment. Although courts generally give an unrepresented plaintiff an opportunity to amend a defective complaint, the court stated that amendment was unnecessary when it would be futile.
Ruling
Judge Colleen McMahon dismissed all three actions as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) and declined to grant leave to amend. The court certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal. The order also directed the Clerk of Court to mail Calvino a copy and note service on the docket.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.