Calvino v. United States District Court Southern District of New York
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:20-cv-00236
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Calvino v. United States District Court Southern District of New York, Judge McMahon dismissed Calvino’s lawyerless complaint as frivolous and denied fee-free status for an appeal.
Ernest Calvino Jr.’s action was dismissed, and he was denied permission to appeal without paying fees. The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York was the named defendant.
What happened
In Calvino v. United States District Court Southern District of New York, Ernest Calvino Jr. sued the federal court using a general complaint form and asked for information, documents, transactions, money, property, businesses, and assets that he said he was supposed to receive from earlier litigation.
The court said the complaint’s claims were irrational and had no legal basis. It dismissed the action as frivolous, meaning the claims lacked a reasonable legal or factual basis, and declined to let Calvino amend because the defects could not be fixed.
Chief Judge Colleen McMahon also ruled that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Calvino permission to appeal without paying fees.
The detailed version
- Calvino v. United States District Court Southern District of New York · No. 1:20-cv-00236
- Colleen McMahon
- Jan. 22, 2020
Background
Ernest Calvino Jr. brought the action without a lawyer against the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The court had already allowed him to proceed without paying the filing fee. Calvino used the court’s general complaint form. He identified the basis of his action as “Garnashment, Lack to Deliver Returnd, transfer Asset in a respectfull and formal way.” He stated that there had been litigation on his behalf in the United States and internationally and that he was seeking information, documents, transactions, attorneys, money, property, businesses, and assets that he believed he should receive from that litigation. He sought the return of property.
Legal standard
The court explained that it must dismiss a complaint filed without paying fees if the complaint is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a legally valid claim, seeks money from a defendant immune from such relief, or presents no federal subject-matter jurisdiction. It also said that complaints filed without a lawyer must be read generously. A claim is frivolous when it has no reasonable basis in law or fact, including when its factual allegations are irrational or its legal theory is plainly meritless.
Court’s analysis
The court concluded that, even when read with the special consideration given to complaints filed without a lawyer, Calvino’s claims were irrational and had no legal theory supporting them. Although courts generally give an opportunity to amend a defective complaint, the court said amendment would be futile here because the defects could not be cured. It therefore declined to grant leave to amend.
The court also described Calvino’s prior filing history, stating that he had filed numerous frivolous actions in the court since December 17, 2019. The court said he had continued filing such complaints after being warned that further vexatious or frivolous litigation could lead to a restriction on filing new actions without paying fees unless he first obtained permission.
Disposition
The court dismissed the action as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). It directed the Clerk of Court to mail Calvino a copy of the order and note service on the docket. The court further certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.