Calvino v. Massachussetts Courts
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:20-cv-00728
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 5
In Calvino v. Massachussetts Courts, Judge McMahon dismissed Calvino’s complaint as frivolous and denied fee-free status for an appeal.
Ernest Calvino Jr.; the listed Massachusetts court defendants; and Calvino’s ability to pursue a fee-free appeal or potentially file future fee-free actions in this court.
What happened
In Calvino v. Massachussetts Courts, Ernest Calvino Jr. sued several Massachusetts court entities, alleging violations of his rights. He asked for court documents and a hearing and referred to alleged fraud, corruption, conspiracies, stolen property, and other grievances, but left the locations and dates of the alleged events blank.
The court said that even under the more forgiving standard applied to people without lawyers, the allegations were irrational and did not support any legal claim. It therefore dismissed the complaint as frivolous and refused to allow an amended complaint because the defects could not be fixed.
Judge Colleen McMahon also warned that further frivolous or abusive lawsuits could lead to restrictions on Calvino’s ability to file new cases without first obtaining permission. The court denied fee-free status for an appeal after certifying that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Calvino v. Massachussetts Courts · No. 1:20-cv-00728
- Colleen McMahon
- Jan. 31, 2020
Background
Ernest Calvino Jr. filed a complaint against the listed Massachusetts court defendants. He sought permission to proceed without paying filing fees, which the court had granted in an earlier order. The complaint invoked federal-question jurisdiction but did not identify a specific federal constitutional or statutory claim. It referred to alleged court fraud, corruption, obstruction of civil and constitutional rights, computer theft, and audio-electronic extortion. Calvino also requested court documents, a hearing, and action concerning alleged defamation or an investigation. He left blank the portions of the complaint asking for the locations and dates of the events.
Legal standard
Because Calvino was proceeding without a lawyer and without prepaying fees, the court was required to dismiss the complaint if it was frivolous, failed to state a claim, sought money from an immune defendant, or fell outside the court’s jurisdiction. A frivolous claim is one that lacks a reasonable basis in fact or law. The court also had to read a self-represented plaintiff’s allegations generously and consider the strongest claims the allegations suggested.
Court’s analysis
The court concluded that Calvino’s claims were irrational and that no legal theory supported them, even when the complaint was read under the more forgiving standard for self-represented litigants. The court therefore dismissed the action as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i).
The court declined to give Calvino an opportunity to amend. Although courts generally allow a self-represented plaintiff to amend a defective complaint, the court found that the defects here could not be corrected through amendment.
Litigation history and warning
The opinion states that Calvino had filed numerous actions in the court during the period discussed, that more than 70 had been dismissed as frivolous, and that he had previously been warned that continued frivolous or abusive litigation could lead to a restriction on filing new cases without prior permission. The court repeated that warning in this case. It did not impose that filing restriction in this order.
Disposition
The complaint was dismissed as frivolous. The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying fees for purposes of an appeal.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.