Fisher v. Miller
- Laura Swain
- 1:21-cv-07784
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
Fisher v. Miller: Judge Swain dismissed Fisher’s amended RICO action for failure to state a claim after finding it added no facts showing a RICO violation.
The dismissal ended Jason D. Fisher’s civil RICO action against Faith Miller (Scheinkman) and the other defendants. The order also denied Fisher permission to appeal without paying filing fees.
What happened
In Fisher v. Miller, Jason D. Fisher, representing himself and without paying filing fees, accused his former wife, her parents, lawyers, and a law firm of violating the civil part of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act during family-court proceedings. The court had previously dismissed his complaint but allowed him to amend it.
Fisher’s amended complaint repeated his earlier allegations and did not add facts showing that the defendants had violated that law. The court said the alleged acts—such as filing court papers, making allegedly false statements, issuing a temporary protection order, and interfering with contact with his children—reflected his disagreement with decisions and litigation strategies in the state-court case, not a racketeering violation.
The court dismissed the action for failure to state a claim and directed the clerk to enter judgment. Judge Laura Taylor Swain also ruled that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Fisher permission to appeal without paying filing fees.
The detailed version
- Fisher v. Miller · No. 1:21-cv-07784
- Laura Swain
- Mar. 3, 2023
Background
Jason D. Fisher filed the action against Faith Miller (Scheinkman) and other defendants. The opinion says Fisher was representing himself and had been allowed to proceed without paying filing fees. He alleged that his former wife, her parents, their lawyers, another lawyer involved in the family-court matter, and that lawyer’s law firm participated in two illegal enterprises intended to defraud him during proceedings in New York Supreme Court, Westchester County.
The court had previously dismissed Fisher’s original complaint for failure to state a claim but gave him permission to file an amended complaint. Fisher filed the amended complaint and reasserted allegations that the New York State judiciary was an illegal enterprise and that Faith Scheinkman’s relationship with her spouse, a judicial officer, helped the alleged enterprise operate without scrutiny.
Claims and allegations
Fisher alleged that people directing the supposed enterprise attempted to violate his bank, email, and other financial accounts. He also alleged that Scheinkman used her relationship with her husband, Judge Scheinkman, to commit crimes. The alleged acts listed in the amended complaint concerned the state-court litigation and included issuing a temporary protection order, filing court documents, making allegedly false statements in court, allowing violations of court orders that prevented Fisher from seeing his children, destroying evidence, and violating a stay involving his medical coverage.
Court’s reasoning
The court concluded that the amended complaint did not allege new facts suggesting a violation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, commonly called RICO. It said the alleged acts, considered together, showed Fisher’s disagreement with litigation strategies and decisions in his state-court case and his general frustration with his adversaries in the matrimonial matter. Those allegations did not state a RICO claim.
Disposition
The court dismissed the action for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). It directed the clerk to enter judgment. The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Fisher permission to appeal without paying filing fees. Judge Laura Taylor Swain signed the order on March 3, 2023.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.