Bralich v. Fox News Network, LLC

Background

Philip A. Bralich brought the action without a lawyer and had previously received permission to proceed without paying filing fees in advance. He named Fox News Network, LLC; MSNBC; CNN Worldwide; the Republican National Party; the Democratic National Party; and Donald J. Trump as defendants.

Bralich’s 53-page complaint described alleged hate speech, bigotry, discrimination, harassment, and harm beginning in periods reaching back to the 1979 announcement of Ronald Reagan’s presidential candidacy. He alleged that a visible limp and other physical characteristics made him a target. He also described alleged effects on his work history, reputation, family life, social life, and mental and physical well-being. The complaint cited various federal statutes and constitutional amendments and sought money damages and an injunction requiring the defendants to stop alleged hate speech, hate crimes, bigotry, and discrimination.

Court’s Analysis

The court explained that it must dismiss a complaint filed without advance payment of fees if the complaint is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a legally valid claim, or seeks money from a defendant protected from that relief. The court must also dismiss a case over which it lacks authority to hear the subject matter.

The court held that the complaint did not satisfy Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which requires a short and plain statement showing why the plaintiff is entitled to relief. The court described the complaint as disjointed and filled with lengthy, unnecessary digressions. It gave as an example Bralich’s response to a question asking when the relevant events occurred: he referred generally to the dawn of humanity or civilization and particularly to Reagan’s candidacy.

The court further stated that it could not identify a legally valid claim for which Bralich had standing. Standing requires a plaintiff to show a concrete personal injury, a connection between that injury and the defendant’s conduct, and a likelihood that a court ruling would remedy the injury. The court found that Bralich’s allegations did not show an invasion of a legally protected interest or facts indicating that any defendant had personally acted against him. It also stated that a federal court is not a forum for general complaints shared by the public.

The court separately explained that Bralich could not pursue constitutional claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Fox News Network, MSNBC, CNN Worldwide, or the two national political parties because those defendants were private parties, not state actors. A state actor is a person or entity acting for the government in the way required for a claim under that statute. The court also stated that the criminal statutes Bralich cited do not allow a private plaintiff to initiate arrests or prosecutions; decisions to bring criminal cases belong to prosecutors.

Disposition

The court did not dismiss the action at that time. Judge Louis L. Stanton granted Bralich 60 days to file an amended complaint complying with Rule 8. The amended complaint had to provide a short statement of the relevant facts for each claim and defendant, identify relevant people and their titles, describe what each defendant did or failed to do, provide dates and locations, explain the alleged injuries, and state the relief sought. The court encouraged Bralich to use its amended-complaint form and, as far as possible, keep the amended complaint to 20 pages or fewer.

The court stated that an amended complaint would replace the original complaint rather than supplement it, so any facts or claims Bralich wished to pursue had to appear in the new filing. The Clerk was directed to mail the order to Bralich and record service on the docket. No summons would issue at that time. If Bralich did not timely amend and could not show good cause for the failure, the court stated that it would enter judgment dismissing the action for failure to state a claim and direct the Clerk to close the case.