Calvino v. The people spying on my in court and everwhere I go
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:20-cv-00385
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Calvino v. The people spying on my in court and everwhere I go, Chief Judge McMahon dismissed the complaint as frivolous.
Ernest Calvino Jr., whose complaint was dismissed and whose fee-free status for an appeal was denied; the named defendants, who were no longer required to respond to this complaint.
What happened
In Calvino v. The people spying on my in court and everwhere I go, Ernest Calvino Jr. sued people he said were spying on him and conspiring against him. He represented himself and was allowed to proceed without paying filing fees.
Calvino alleged that unknown people used hidden devices to monitor him, interfere with his communications, and steal personal, banking, and intellectual-property information. He also alleged various conspiracies and requested trillions of dollars, information, and justice.
Chief Judge Colleen McMahon ruled that the allegations were irrational and had no legal basis. She dismissed the complaint as frivolous, did not allow Calvino to amend it, and denied fee-free status for any appeal.
The detailed version
- Calvino v. The people spying on my in court and everwhere I go · No. 1:20-cv-00385
- Colleen McMahon
- Jan. 21, 2020
Background
Ernest Calvino Jr., proceeding without a lawyer, brought the action against “The People Spying on My in Court and Everywhere I Go,” Fauto Lipa, and other named defendants. He was allowed to proceed without paying filing fees. On the complaint form, he asserted diversity jurisdiction and listed several alleged conspiracies, including conspiracies involving intellectual property, exploitation, computer theft, and scams.
Calvino alleged that unknown people used hidden devices to watch him, share information about him, interfere with his communications, control aspects of his life, and take his personal information, banking information, and intellectual property. He sought “Money relief trillions,” information about the lost information, and justice.
Court’s analysis
The court explained that it must dismiss a complaint filed without prepaying fees if it is frivolous, fails to state a legally sufficient claim, seeks money from an immune defendant, or falls outside the court’s jurisdiction. A claim is frivolous when it has no reasonable factual or legal basis. Although courts generally read filings by people without lawyers generously, the court found that Calvino’s allegations were irrational and that no legal theory supported them.
The court also concluded that the defects could not be fixed by changing the complaint. It therefore declined to allow an amended complaint. The opinion noted that Calvino had filed 65 actions in the court between December 17, 2019, and January 16, 2020, and that more than 30 had been dismissed as frivolous. It also noted that he had been warned that additional frivolous or harassing litigation could lead to restrictions on filing new actions without paying fees.
Ruling
Chief United States District Judge Colleen McMahon dismissed the complaint as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). The court certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Calvino permission to appeal without prepaying fees. The order did not state that the dismissal was with or without prejudice.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.