Scales v. The Supreme Court of the United States

Background

William Scales, appearing without a lawyer, sued the United States Supreme Court and the Supreme Court of Kings County, New York. He invoked federal-question and diversity jurisdiction and alleged that the defendants violated his federally protected and constitutional rights and acted negligently. His allegations included claims that the defendants interfered with court orders, prevented lawsuits involving businesses and government entities, and caused financial losses, lost revenue, and missed business opportunities. He sought money damages.

Scales was allowed to proceed without prepaying filing fees. The court explained that it must dismiss a complaint filed this way if it is frivolous, fails to state a claim, seeks money from an immune defendant, or falls outside the court’s jurisdiction. The court also noted that it must interpret filings by an unrepresented person liberally, although those filings still must satisfy the requirement to provide a short and plain statement showing entitlement to relief.

Claims Against the United States Supreme Court

The court held that sovereign immunity barred Scales’s claims against the United States Supreme Court. Sovereign immunity generally prevents federal courts from hearing suits against the federal government and its components unless the government has waived that immunity. The court therefore dismissed the claims against the United States Supreme Court as barred by sovereign immunity.

Claims Against the Supreme Court of Kings County

The court held that the claims against the Supreme Court of Kings County were barred by the Eleventh Amendment. That immunity generally protects states from suits in federal court unless the state consents or Congress removes the immunity. The opinion stated that New York had not waived its immunity for these claims, Congress had not removed it through 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and New York’s immunity extends to the New York State Unified Court System. The court therefore dismissed the claims against the Supreme Court of Kings County.

The court also noted that Scales had previously filed a related complaint with similar allegations, which another federal court had dismissed on immunity grounds. This opinion does not identify any basis for treating the current claims differently.

Leave to Amend and Warning

The court denied leave to amend because it found that the defects in the complaint could not be cured by amendment. It also warned that further duplicative or meritless litigation could result in an order requiring Scales to show why he should not be barred from filing additional actions without first obtaining the court’s permission. The court noted that such a filing restriction could not be imposed without notice and an opportunity to be heard.

Disposition

The court dismissed the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(iii). It directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment. The court certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Scales permission to proceed without paying fees for an appeal.