Parham v. The United States Government
- Laura Swain
- 1:22-cv-10568
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Parham v. United States Government, Judge Swain dismissed the case because sovereign immunity barred Parham’s claims against the United States.
Jamar Parham’s lawsuit against the United States Government was dismissed; the order also denied fee-free status for an appeal.
What happened
In Parham v. The United States Government, Jamar Parham, who was representing himself, sued the United States Government, alleging that his human rights had been violated. He described a sexual assault when he was five years old and other alleged harm, but did not specify what relief he wanted.
The court dismissed the complaint during its required review of a case filed without paying fees. It ruled that the United States is generally protected from lawsuits unless it has agreed to be sued, and that Parham’s allegations did not show that an exception applied. The court also said the complaint’s defects could not be fixed by amendment, so it did not give him permission to amend it.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain dismissed the complaint under sovereign immunity, terminated all other pending matters, and directed the clerk to enter judgment. She also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for an appeal.
The detailed version
- Parham v. The United States Government · No. 1:22-cv-10568
- Laura Swain
- Mar. 6, 2023
Background
Jamar Parham filed an action against the United States Government, invoking federal-question jurisdiction and alleging that his human rights had been violated. He was representing himself. The court had previously allowed him to proceed without paying filing fees.
Parham alleged that, during the winter of 1989, when he was five years old, an older cousin sexually assaulted him. He also alleged that his aunt and grandmother planned the assault, that he later suffered emotional distress and underwent surgery in his late twenties, and that family members harmed and framed him. He further alleged that he had been affected by magic since he was about twenty-two years old. The complaint did not identify the relief Parham sought.
Court’s analysis
Because Parham was proceeding without paying filing fees, the court was required to dismiss the complaint if it was frivolous, malicious, failed to state a legally valid claim, sought money from an immune defendant, or presented claims over which the court lacked authority. The court also explained that it had to read a self-represented litigant’s allegations generously, but the complaint still had to provide enough factual detail to make a plausible claim for relief.
The court applied sovereign immunity, a rule that generally protects the United States from being sued unless it has agreed to the lawsuit. The court concluded that sovereign immunity barred Parham’s claims against the United States Government. It also noted that the Federal Tort Claims Act provides a limited exception to sovereign immunity for certain injuries caused by federal employees, but said Parham’s complaint did not allege facts suggesting that any federal agency or federal employee was involved.
The court decided that the complaint’s defects could not be corrected by amendment and therefore declined to allow Parham to amend it.
Disposition
The court dismissed Parham’s complaint under sovereign immunity. It terminated all other pending matters and 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 Parham permission to proceed without paying fees for purposes of an appeal.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.