Calvino v. The Jaimacan

Background

Ernest Calvino Jr. filed the action without a lawyer. He asserted that the court had federal-question and diversity jurisdiction. The court had previously allowed him to proceed without prepaying filing fees.

Calvino identified the alleged federal constitutional or statutory basis of his claims as “misleading my and others, lack of hone[s]ty[,] disrespect, computer neglect.” He alleged that an unknown person who claimed to help him threatened and intimidated him electronically, harmed his mental and emotional health, and caused losses involving intellectual property, a corporation, businesses, money, and time. He requested support from government authorities and another plaintiff who could support his complaint.

Calvino listed “Elok M. (Tesla)” as another plaintiff, but Calvino was the only person who signed the complaint. The court held that a person litigating without a lawyer cannot represent another person in the action. It therefore treated Calvino as the only plaintiff and dismissed any claims asserted on behalf of “Elok M. (Tesla)” without prejudice.

Legal standard

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), the court must dismiss a complaint filed without prepaying fees if it is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim for relief, or seeks money from a defendant legally immune from such relief. A claim is frivolous when it has no arguable legal or factual basis. The court must also dismiss a case when it lacks authority to hear the subject matter. Although courts read complaints filed by people without lawyers generously, that does not require allowing claims that are irrational or unsupported by a legal theory.

Court’s analysis and ruling

The court concluded that, even when read generously, Calvino’s claims were irrational and had no legal theory supporting them. Because the defects could not be fixed by changing the complaint, the court declined to give Calvino permission to amend it.

The court dismissed the action as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). It did not state that this dismissal was with or without prejudice. The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees. The court noted that it had previously warned Calvino that further frivolous or harassing litigation could lead to an order barring him from filing new civil actions without the court’s permission.