Johnson v. EPA Canada

Background

Clarence D. Johnson Jr. filed this action without a lawyer and invoked the court’s federal-question jurisdiction. The court had previously allowed him to proceed without paying filing fees, a status commonly called proceeding without prepayment of fees. Johnson asserted claims for himself and on behalf of Nehemiah H+G Construction. The complaint listed numerous defendants and referred to alleged violations involving “RICO acts,” a church government, YouTube owners, criminal evidence, conspiracy, arrest warrants, and indictments. In the requested relief, Johnson sought “capital punishment” and “violence against women until death.” He also attached pages listing businesses, federal entities, a hospital, addresses, telephone numbers, and various phrases.

Legal standards

Because Johnson was proceeding without a lawyer and without prepaying filing fees, the court was required to dismiss any complaint that was frivolous, malicious, failed to state a legally sufficient claim, sought money from an immune defendant, or was filed without subject-matter jurisdiction. A claim is frivolous when it has no arguable factual or legal basis. The court also stated that it had to read a self-represented litigant’s filing generously and consider the strongest claims reasonably suggested by the allegations.

Claims brought for Nehemiah H+G Construction

The court dismissed without prejudice the claims Johnson asserted on behalf of H+G. Federal law allows a person to represent himself, but a nonlawyer generally cannot represent another entity in federal court. Johnson did not allege that he was a lawyer, and he did not allege that H+G was a sole proprietorship. The court therefore concluded that he could not litigate H+G’s claims for the entity.

Johnson’s own claims

The court dismissed as frivolous the claims Johnson asserted on his own behalf. Even after reading the complaint generously, the court found that the allegations were irrational and lacked a factual basis or legal theory supporting a valid claim. The court declined to allow amendment because it determined that the defects could not be cured by changing the complaint.

Possible filing restriction

The court directed Johnson to submit a declaration within 30 days explaining why it should not bar him from filing any future civil action in that court without prepaying fees unless he first obtained permission. The court said a prior order had warned him that repeated duplicative or frivolous litigation could lead to such a restriction. The court had not yet imposed the restriction in this order; it directed Johnson to show why it should not be imposed. If he failed to submit the declaration on time, or if it did not show good cause, the court stated that it would enter the filing restriction.

Disposition

The court dismissed the action. It dismissed without prejudice Johnson’s claims asserted on behalf of Nehemiah H+G Construction and dismissed as frivolous Johnson’s claims asserted on his own behalf. The court instructed the clerk to keep the matter open until judgment was entered. Judge Laura Taylor Swain also certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Johnson permission to proceed without paying fees for purposes of an appeal.