Bantis v. Government USA
- Laura Swain
- 1:23-cv-02492
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 5
Bantis v. Government USA was dismissed as sovereign-immune and frivolous; Judge Swain denied leave to amend.
Matthew Bantis, who represented himself, and the defendant identified in the caption as Government USA. The order ended the action, denied leave to amend, and denied permission to proceed without prepaying fees for an appeal.
What happened
In Bantis v. Government USA, Matthew Bantis, representing himself, sued the defendant identified as Government USA and sought $20 million. He described problems involving chess, fighting, basketball, and school, and alleged that the federal government was involved in some of those experiences.
The court said claims against the federal government are generally barred by sovereign immunity unless an exception applies. It found that Bantis had not alleged that he completed the required administrative process for a claim under the Federal Tort Claims Act. The court also found that his allegations were irrational or wholly incredible and did not state a plausible legal claim.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain dismissed the action for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction and as frivolous. She declined to allow an amended complaint because she found that the defects could not be cured. The court also denied permission to proceed without paying fees for an appeal and directed the Clerk to enter judgment.
The detailed version
- Bantis v. Government USA · No. 1:23-cv-02492
- Laura Swain
- June 12, 2023
Background
Matthew Bantis, who appeared without a lawyer, sued the defendant captioned as Government USA and invoked federal-question jurisdiction. The court had previously allowed him to proceed without prepaying filing fees. Bantis sought $20 million.
His complaint alleged that people used earpieces in chess and that he was not allowed to compete because of opposing players’ ignorance and insecurity. He also alleged that Tiger Schulman’s promised opportunity to enter professional fighting was not provided, that people in basketball organizations passed him over and did not help develop him, and that a foreign government’s school had disrespected him and forged four grades on his transcript.
Reasons for Dismissal
The court explained that sovereign immunity generally prevents federal courts from hearing lawsuits against the United States unless the government has waived that immunity. The court considered whether the Federal Tort Claims Act, which waives immunity for certain damages claims based on tortious conduct by federal employees acting within their jobs, could apply.
The court said that a person bringing such a claim generally must first submit a written damages claim to the appropriate federal government entity and receive a final written determination, or wait six months without one. Bantis did not allege that he had filed this administrative claim and received a final written determination, and he also did not allege that six months had passed since filing such a claim. The court therefore dismissed any damages claims he sought to pursue under the Federal Tort Claims Act under sovereign immunity and for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
The court also reviewed the complaint under the screening rule for lawsuits filed without prepaying fees. It found that, even reading the complaint generously, Bantis alleged no facts showing a plausible legal claim. The court characterized the allegations about federal-government involvement in his experiences with chess, sports, and school as largely irrational or wholly incredible. It therefore additionally dismissed the action as frivolous, meaning lacking an arguable basis in law or fact.
Disposition
The court dismissed the action under the doctrine of sovereign immunity and, consequently, for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. It additionally dismissed the action as frivolous. The court declined to grant leave to amend because it found that the defects could not be cured by amendment. It certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith, denied Bantis permission to proceed without prepaying fees for an appeal, and directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.