Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 17, 2020

Calvino v. Bronx Work Clains

Judge
Colleen McMahon
Docket
1:20-cv-00147
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Calvino v. Bronx Work Clains, Judge McMahon dismissed the frivolous lawsuit and denied fee-free appeal status.

Who this affects

Ernest Calvino, Jr., whose action was dismissed as frivolous; the defendants named as Bronx Work Clains and Informants or Mensager were not required to litigate the case further.

What happened

In Calvino v. Bronx Work Clains, Ernest Calvino, Jr., representing himself, described alleged threats, harassment, and extortion involving a person and sought money, respect, and justice.

The court said the allegations were irrational and did not identify a legal theory supporting a claim. It also concluded that changing the complaint would not fix its defects, so it did not allow amendment.

Judge McMahon dismissed the action as frivolous under the federal filing-fee statute, certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith, and denied fee-free status for an appeal.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Calvino v. Bronx Work Clains · No. 1:20-cv-00147
Judge
Colleen McMahon
Date
Jan. 17, 2020

Background

Ernest Calvino, Jr., brought the action without a lawyer. The opinion states that he did not specify whether federal-question or diversity jurisdiction supported the case. The court had previously allowed him to proceed without prepaying filing fees.

Calvino identified the alleged basis of his claims as “harassment, indirect[t] threat, threat, indirect[t] [e]xtortion.” He alleged that a person indirectly asked for something in an intimidating way, threatened to kill him if he did not sue a specific person, and later walked toward the civil court near Yankee Stadium. He identified his injuries as stress and loss of respect and requested “money, respect, justices.”

Court’s analysis

The court explained that it must dismiss a complaint filed without prepaying fees if it is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim, or seeks money from a legally immune defendant. It also must dismiss when it lacks authority to hear the case. The court said it must read filings from 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 theory supporting them. It therefore found the action frivolous. The court also concluded that the defects could not be fixed by changing the complaint, so it declined to grant permission to amend.

Disposition

Judge Colleen McMahon dismissed the action as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Calvino permission to appeal without prepaying fees. The opinion also states that Calvino had filed other frivolous actions and had previously been warned that further such litigation could lead to restrictions on filing future civil actions without the court’s permission.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.