Calvino v. Armany
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:20-cv-00387
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Ernest Calvino Jr. v. Armany, Judge McMahon dismissed the complaint as frivolous and denied fee-free appeal status.
Ernest Calvino Jr., whose complaint was dismissed and who was denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees; Armany, the named defendant.
What happened
Ernest Calvino Jr. v. Armany involved a complaint filed by Ernest Calvino Jr., who represented himself and sought to proceed without paying the filing fee. He invoked the court’s authority over disputes between citizens of different states, and alleged claims involving unpaid money, garnishment, intellectual property, and property or money that was not delivered, transferred, or returned.
The court said the allegations were irrational and did not support any legal theory. It also noted that Calvino had filed about 45 cases without paying filing fees during the previous month. Because the defects could not be fixed by changing the complaint, the court declined to allow an amended complaint.
Judge Colleen McMahon dismissed the action as frivolous under the federal statute governing screening of cases filed without prepaying fees. She also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Calvino permission to pursue an appeal without prepaying the required fees.
The detailed version
- Calvino v. Armany · No. 1:20-cv-00387
- Colleen McMahon
- Jan. 17, 2020
Background
Ernest Calvino Jr. appeared without a lawyer and brought the action under the court’s diversity jurisdiction. The court had previously allowed him to proceed without prepaying the filing fee.
Calvino listed claims described in the complaint as failure to pay, garnishment, failure to provide information about his intellectual property, and failure to deliver, transfer, or return property and money. He said the claims arose “since 2018” and identified the place of occurrence as “internet to official item.” In response to a question asking him to describe what happened, he wrote: “Glase enovetion. [sic] The[y are] suppose[d] to pay for my intellectual propert[ies].” The meaning of the first phrase is unclear from the opinion.
The court also noted that Calvino had filed approximately 45 actions without prepaying filing fees during the previous month. In an earlier related proceeding, the court had directed him to explain why he should not be barred from filing new actions without prepaying fees unless he first obtained court permission.
Court’s analysis
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), the court must dismiss a case filed without prepaying fees if it is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim for relief, or seeks money from a defendant who is immune from such relief. The court must read filings by people without lawyers generously and interpret them to present the strongest claims reasonably suggested by the allegations.
The court concluded that, even under that generous standard, Calvino’s claims were irrational and had no legal basis. It therefore determined that the complaint was frivolous. Although courts generally allow a self-represented plaintiff to amend a defective complaint, the court found that amendment would be futile because the defects could not be cured.
Ruling
Judge Colleen McMahon dismissed the complaint as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) and declined to grant leave to amend. The clerk was directed to mail Calvino a copy of the order and record service on the docket. The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.