Fair v. Yellen
- Laura Swain
- 1:22-cv-09255
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 5
In Fair v. Yellen, Judge Swain dismissed Fair’s complaint as frivolous because recorded documents did not support his claimed Treasury payment.
Keith Darnell Fair’s complaint was dismissed, and his fee-free status for an appeal was denied. Janet Yellen was the sole defendant named in the action.
What happened
In Fair v. Yellen, Keith Darnell Fair sued Janet Yellen, the U.S. Secretary of the Treasury, seeking payment based on documents he recorded with the Oneida County Clerk. He brought the case without a lawyer and was allowed to proceed without paying the filing fee upfront.
The court found that Fair’s claims had no supporting facts or valid legal basis. It concluded that similar theories had repeatedly been rejected as frivolous and that changing the complaint would not fix its problems.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain dismissed the complaint as frivolous, denied Fair permission to amend, directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment, and denied fee-free status for any appeal because an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Fair v. Yellen · No. 1:22-cv-09255
- Laura Swain
- Nov. 7, 2022
Background
Keith Darnell Fair sued Janet Yellen, the U.S. Secretary of the Treasury. Fair was civilly committed and confined in a Secure Treatment and Rehabilitation Center, and he brought the action without a lawyer. The court had previously allowed him to proceed without paying filing fees upfront.
Fair sought payment based on documents he recorded with the Oneida County Clerk. He described himself as a “Private Citizen,” claimed beneficial ownership of the all-capitalized name “KEITH DARNELL FAIR,” and referred to trust records, a business trust, a conveyance, and a bill in equity. He alleged that the defendant failed to make a payment and asserted due-process, fraud, breach-of-fiduciary-duty, and contract-related theories.
Court’s analysis
Because Fair was proceeding without paying the filing fee, the court screened the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). That statute requires dismissal of an action that is frivolous, fails to state a claim, or seeks money from a defendant who is immune from that relief. The court also explained that it must dismiss claims over which it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction.
The court read Fair’s allegations liberally but concluded that they lacked a factual basis and that no legal theory supported his demand for payment from the U.S. Treasury based on recorded documents. The court noted that similar “private citizen,” trust, and beneficiary theories had been rejected as frivolous in other cases. It concluded that the defects could not be cured by amendment.
Disposition
The court dismissed Fair’s complaint as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). Judge Laura Taylor Swain declined to allow amendment, certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith, denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal, and directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment. The opinion does not state a separate disposition using “with prejudice” or “without prejudice.”
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.