Boone v. Federal Goverment
- Laura Swain
- 1:23-cv-03244
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Boone v. Federal Goverment, Judge Swain dismissed Alphonzo Boone’s frivolous lawsuit seeking a genuine $50 bill or money order.
Alphonzo Boone’s action was dismissed as frivolous, and he was not granted permission to amend the complaint. The court also denied fee-waiver status for an appeal. The defendants named in the complaint were the United States of America as understood by the court, an unspecified foreign state, and an unspecified foreign currency.
What happened
In Boone v. Federal Goverment, Alphonzo Boone, representing himself, sued the United States, an unspecified foreign state, and an unspecified foreign currency. He asked the court to send him a genuine $50 bill or a $50 money order.
Boone said he brought a $50 bill to a Carver Federal Bank branch in New York on or about November 20, 2022, and discovered that it was counterfeit. The court ruled that these allegations did not provide a legal basis for a civil claim and dismissed the action as frivolous.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain also declined to allow Boone to amend his complaint because she found that its legal defect could not be cured. The court directed the Clerk to enter judgment and denied Boone the ability to proceed without paying fees on any appeal, certifying that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Boone v. Federal Goverment · No. 1:23-cv-03244
- Laura Swain
- June 12, 2023
Background
Alphonzo Boone, who was representing himself, filed an action invoking federal-question and diversity jurisdiction. The complaint named the “Federal Goverment,” which the court understood to mean the United States of America; a “Foren Goverment,” which the court understood to be an unspecified foreign state; and “Foren currancicy,” which the court understood to be an unspecified foreign currency.
Boone alleged that, on or about November 20, 2022, he brought a $50 bill to a branch of Carver Federal Bank in New York, New York, and discovered there that the bill was counterfeit. He requested that the court send him a genuine $50 bill or a $50 money order at his address of record. The court had previously granted him permission to proceed without prepaying filing fees.
Legal standard
Because Boone was proceeding without prepaying fees, the court was required to dismiss the complaint if it was frivolous, malicious, failed to state a claim, sought monetary relief from an immune defendant, or presented claims over which the court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction. A claim is frivolous when it lacks an arguable basis in law or fact. The court also had to interpret a self-represented litigant’s allegations liberally and consider the strongest claims they reasonably suggested.
Court’s analysis
The court concluded that Boone’s allegations were frivolous because they did not identify any legal theory supporting a viable civil claim. The allegations that Boone possessed a $50 bill, brought it to a bank, and learned it was counterfeit did not establish a claim against the United States, the unspecified foreign state, or the unspecified foreign currency. The court therefore dismissed the action as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i).
Although courts generally give self-represented plaintiffs an opportunity to amend defective complaints, the court found that amendment would be futile because Boone’s assertions lacked an arguable legal basis. It therefore declined to grant leave to amend.
Disposition
The court dismissed the action as frivolous and directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment. It certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Boone permission to proceed without paying fees for an appeal.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.