Calderon Ortiz v. AmTrust North America, Inc.

Background

Ana Calderon Ortiz, appearing without a lawyer, filed claims for herself and on behalf of Bonitas Nails and Spa, Inc. She named AmTrust North America, GC Brokerage Corp., Chesnut Holdings, and the New York State Workers Compensation Board as defendants. The complaint referred to a commercial lease, business insurance, pandemic-related business losses, alleged denial of coverage and benefits, allegedly abusive lease terms, and alleged failures by the insurance broker and the Workers Compensation Board.

The complaint listed claims including breach of contract, fraud, data breach, credit-card fraud, Social Security fraud, false claims, and banking fraud. It also referred to the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Family Medical Leave Act. Calderon Ortiz sought $10 million for alleged illnesses and other injuries. The court reviewed the complaint under the screening requirement for cases filed without prepayment of fees. That requirement calls for dismissal of claims that are frivolous, fail to state a legally sufficient claim, seek money from an immune defendant, or fall outside the court’s subject-matter jurisdiction.

Rulings

The court dismissed, without prejudice, the claims Calderon Ortiz attempted to bring on behalf of Bonitas because a nonlawyer cannot represent a corporation in federal court. The court also dismissed the claims suggesting violations of federal criminal statutes for failure to state a claim, explaining that private individuals cannot control whether criminal charges are brought.

The court concluded that the complaint did not identify a disability, a qualifying defendant or discriminatory conduct under the Americans with Disabilities Act. It also found that the complaint did not explain how any defendant violated the Family Medical Leave Act, particularly because Calderon Ortiz indicated that she was self-employed. The court granted leave to amend to provide additional facts supporting possible claims under both statutes.

The court treated the claim against the Workers Compensation Board as potentially arising under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a law that permits claims for violations of federal rights by state actors. It dismissed that claim on immunity grounds because the Board is an arm of New York State, and the court stated that New York had not waived its immunity and Congress had not removed it for this type of claim.

The court also found that the complaint did not establish diversity jurisdiction over possible state-law claims. Although Calderon Ortiz sought $10 million, the court said she had not alleged facts showing a reasonable probability that the jurisdictional amount was met, and the complaint indicated that all parties except AmTrust were New York citizens. The court granted leave to amend to show a basis for federal jurisdiction, including the possibility of proceeding with state-law claims solely against AmTrust. It reserved a later decision on whether to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over state-law claims if no federal claim remained.

Leave to Amend and Disposition

The court granted Calderon Ortiz leave to file an amended complaint within 60 days. The amended complaint must replace the original complaint, include all claims and facts she wants considered, identify what each defendant did, and describe the relevant events, injuries, and requested relief. No summons would issue at that time. The court stated that failure to comply, absent good cause, would result in dismissal for failure to state a claim. It also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied payment-free status for purposes of an appeal.