Honda v. Silva Passos
- Louis Stanton
- 1:20-cv-03977
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 5
In Honda v. Silva Passos, Judge Stanton dismissed Honda’s claims and denied his request for pro bono counsel as moot.
Marcal Honda’s claims were dismissed: his False Claims Act claims for lack of statutory standing and his claims brought on his own behalf for failure to state a claim. His request for pro bono counsel was denied as moot. The defendants were Daniel Silva Passos, Alexandre de Moraes, Antonio Carlos Cedenho, and Luis Fernando Valim Weffort.
What happened
In Honda v. Silva Passos, Marcal Honda, representing himself, sued four defendants over alleged fraud, retaliation, harassment, and other violations connected to events in Brazil and New York. He sought to sue for the United States under a law addressing fraud against the federal government.
The court ruled that Honda could not bring that government fraud claim because people representing themselves do not have the required legal authority to bring such claims. To the extent he sued for his own injuries, the court found that he alleged no facts showing that the defendants violated his federal rights and dismissed those claims for failing to state a valid claim.
Judge Louis L. Stanton dismissed the claims, declined to allow Honda to amend the complaint because amendment would be futile, and denied Honda’s request for pro bono counsel as moot.
The detailed version
- Honda v. Silva Passos · No. 1:20-cv-03977
- Louis Stanton
- June 15, 2020
Background
Marcal Honda, appearing without a lawyer, filed a private lawsuit under the False Claims Act, a federal law addressing fraud against the United States. He said he was suing for the United States and referred to alleged payments to Brazil’s Ministry of Justice, obstruction of justice, medical fraud, retaliation, harassment, wage-related harms, and interference with his ability to occupy a federal police position. He sued Daniel Silva Passos, Alexandre de Moraes, Antonio Carlos Cedenho, and Luis Fernando Valim Weffort.
The court had previously allowed Honda to proceed without paying the filing fee. The opinion states that Honda’s allegations were unclear and that he identified events in São Paulo, Brazil, as well as alleged medical fraud connected to work at Bellevue Hospital in New York.
False Claims Act claims
The court dismissed Honda’s claims brought for the United States because he lacked statutory standing. Statutory standing means having the authority that a particular law requires to bring a claim. The court held that a person representing himself cannot bring a private False Claims Act lawsuit on behalf of the United States.
Claims brought for Honda’s own injuries
The court also dismissed any claims Honda was bringing on his own behalf for failure to state a claim on which relief could be granted. The court found that Honda did not allege facts showing that any defendant violated his rights under federal law. It also found that statements about medical fraud, obstruction of justice, and harassment were unsupported legal conclusions rather than factual allegations establishing a plausible claim.
Disposition
The court declined to give Honda permission to amend the complaint because it concluded that the defects could not be cured by amendment. It dismissed the False Claims Act claims for lack of statutory standing, dismissed the claims brought on Honda’s own behalf for failure to state a claim, and denied Honda’s application for the court to request pro bono counsel as moot. Judge Louis L. Stanton signed the order.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.