Calvino v. Snower
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:20-cv-00148
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
Judge McMahon dismissed Calvino v. Snower as frivolous and denied fee-free appeal status.
Ernest Calvino Jr.'s action was dismissed, he was not allowed to amend the complaint, and fee-free appeal status was denied. The complaint named Edward Snower, Marvin Andino, and Tatiana Hernandez as defendants.
What happened
In Calvino v. Snower, Ernest Calvino Jr. sued under federal-question jurisdiction and proceeded without a lawyer or paying filing fees.
The complaint named Edward Snower, Marvin Andino, and Tatiana Hernandez, and sought information and the transfer or value of money and assets. It also alleged a conspiracy involving electronic torture, theft, spying, harassment, and other conduct.
Judge Colleen McMahon dismissed the action as frivolous because the allegations were irrational and had no legal theory supporting them. The court denied permission to amend and found that an appeal without paying fees would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Calvino v. Snower · No. 1:20-cv-00148
- Colleen McMahon
- Jan. 17, 2020
Background
Ernest Calvino Jr. brought the action without a lawyer. The court had previously allowed him to proceed without paying filing fees. Although the caption identifies Edward Snower as the defendant, the opinion's background section states that the complaint was filed against Edward Snower, Marvin Andino, and Tatiana Hernandez.
The complaint invoked federal-question jurisdiction. Calvino alleged that the defendants failed to transfer assets, provide investigative information, and enforce his legal and constitutional rights. He sought information about an alleged conspiracy, as well as money and the estimated value of assets pending transfer.
Legal standard
The court explained that it must screen a complaint filed without paying fees and dismiss it if it is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a legally sufficient claim, seeks money from an immune defendant, or falls outside the court's subject-matter jurisdiction. A claim is frivolous when it has no arguable basis in law or fact, including when its factual allegations are irrational or wholly incredible. The court also stated that pleadings filed by people without lawyers must be read liberally, meaning the court should interpret them to present the strongest claims they reasonably suggest.
Court's analysis
Even under that liberal reading, the court concluded that Calvino's claims were irrational and that no legal theory supported them. The court found that the defects could not be fixed by amendment. It therefore declined to give Calvino permission to file an amended complaint.
The opinion also noted that Calvino had filed 45 actions in the court between December 17, 2019, and January 9, 2020, and that 17 had been dismissed as frivolous. It stated that he had been warned that further vexatious or frivolous litigation could lead to restrictions on filing new actions without paying fees unless he first obtained permission. The opinion further noted that, in another order, he had been directed to explain why such a restriction should not be imposed.
Disposition
The court dismissed this action as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). It directed the clerk to mail the order to Calvino and record service on the docket. Judge Colleen McMahon also certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Calvino permission to appeal without paying fees.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.