McKay v. Skarsguard

Background

Edna Gwendolyn McKay appeared without a lawyer and filed a complaint invoking federal-question jurisdiction. She named Alexander Skarsguard, Ron McKay, and Shawn Knowles Carter as defendants. The court understood the first defendant to be actor Alexander Skarsgård and the third to be rapper Jay-Z, and noted that the complaint appeared to treat one defendant as having multiple aliases even though it seemed to identify three people.

McKay alleged, among other things, that she had been neglected and abused, forcibly placed in a hospital during June and July 2021, given medications against her will, and denied money and a clean environment. She also described injuries and requested various forms of relief, including child support and relief related to a condition she called “albanism.”

Jurisdiction and dismissal

The court explained that federal-question jurisdiction requires a claim arising under the Constitution, federal laws, or treaties. It held that McKay’s allegations, even when read generously because she was representing herself, did not plausibly suggest a viable federal claim. Merely checking the federal-question box on a complaint did not establish jurisdiction.

The court also considered diversity jurisdiction, which generally requires complete diversity of citizenship and more than $75,000 in controversy. McKay identified herself as a New York resident and provided the same Brooklyn, New York, address for all three defendants. Although the court said it was unclear where Alexander Skarsgård and Shawn Knowles Carter actually lived, it presumed that the address for Ron McKay was accurate. Because McKay and at least one defendant resided in New York, the court held that complete diversity was absent.

The court therefore dismissed the complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(h)(3). It declined to grant leave to amend because the alleged defects could not be cured: the complaint did not suggest a viable federal claim, and McKay and at least one defendant were residents of New York. The court also stated that the complaint contained allegations against Alexander Skarsgård and Shawn Knowles Carter that bordered on frivolous.

Other rulings

The court noted that McKay had filed two other actions in the same court against Ron McKay and Shawn Knowles Carter that had been dismissed as frivolous. It warned that further frivolous or vexatious litigation could lead to an order barring her from filing new civil actions without paying filing fees unless she first obtained court permission.

The court certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal. It directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment.