Calvino v. T.D. Bank
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:20-cv-00518
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 5
In Calvino v. T.D. Bank, Judge McMahon dismissed the complaint as frivolous and denied fee-free status for any appeal.
Ernest Calvino Jr.’s claims against T.D. Bank were dismissed as frivolous. Any claims he asserted for “Jessica A.” were dismissed without prejudice. The ruling also affects Calvino’s ability to appeal without paying fees and warns of possible future filing restrictions.
What happened
In Calvino v. T.D. Bank, Ernest Calvino Jr. sued T.D. Bank, claiming conspiracy involving bank fraud, computer theft, electronic deception, and scams. He also listed “Jessica A.” as a plaintiff, but only Calvino signed the complaint.
The court dismissed Calvino’s complaint as frivolous because the allegations were irrational and did not present a valid legal theory. It dismissed any claims brought for Jessica A. without prejudice, declined to allow Calvino to amend the complaint, and warned that further frivolous or vexatious lawsuits could lead to limits on filing without paying fees. The court also denied fee-free status for an appeal.
Judge Colleen McMahon issued the dismissal on January 22, 2020, under the federal law governing complaints filed without paying court fees.
The detailed version
- Calvino v. T.D. Bank · No. 1:20-cv-00518
- Colleen McMahon
- Jan. 22, 2020
Background
Ernest Calvino Jr. filed a complaint against T.D. Bank and requested permission to proceed without paying court fees. The court had granted that request on January 22, 2020. Calvino used the court’s general complaint form and invoked federal jurisdiction based on the parties’ citizenship.
Calvino described his claims as “conspiracy of bank fraund,” “conspiracy of computer theft,” “conspiracy of electronic misleadment,” and “conspiracy of scam.” He stated that money was missing from bank accounts and alleged that people at a bank had misled him about whether money was there. He listed New York, Massachusetts, and “other” as places where events occurred but did not provide dates.
Calvino also listed “Jessica A.” as another plaintiff. Because only Calvino signed the complaint, and a person proceeding without a lawyer cannot represent another person, the court treated Calvino as the only plaintiff. It dismissed any claims asserted on Jessica A.’s behalf without prejudice.
Court’s reasoning
A court must dismiss a complaint filed without paying fees if it is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a legally valid claim, seeks money from an immune defendant, or falls outside the court’s subject-matter jurisdiction. The court must read filings by people without lawyers generously and interpret them to raise their strongest possible claims.
Even under that standard, the court concluded that Calvino’s allegations were irrational and had no legal theory supporting relief. It therefore dismissed the action as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). The court also concluded that the defects could not be fixed by amending the complaint, so it declined to grant leave to amend.
Disposition
The court dismissed Calvino’s complaint as frivolous. It separately dismissed any claims asserted for Jessica A. without prejudice. The court warned that further vexatious or frivolous litigation could result in an order barring Calvino from filing new actions without paying fees unless he first obtained permission. It certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.