Summary
The United States District Court for the District of Columbia grants the pro se plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis but dismisses the complaint as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i). The court concludes that the allegations of an implausible criminal conspiracy and related wrongdoing are both frivolous and maliciously abusive of the judicial process.
Holdings
- The complaint was properly dismissed as frivolous and malicious because it lacked an arguable basis in law or fact and was plainly abusive of the judicial process.
- The court could not exercise subject matter jurisdiction over claims that were so attenuated and unsubstantial as to be absolutely devoid of merit.
Questions Presented
- Whether the complaint should be dismissed at initial screening under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) as frivolous or malicious.
- Whether allegations that are irrational, wholly incredible, fanciful, or otherwise patently insubstantial deprive the federal court of subject matter jurisdiction.
Disposition
dismissed
Cases Cited (10)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009)(followed)
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)(followed)
- Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989)(followed)
- Crisafi v. Holland, 655 F.2d 1305, 1307-09 (D.C. Cir. 1981)(followed)
- Hagans v. Lavine, 415 U.S. 528, 536-37 (1974)(followed)
- Newburyport Water Co. v. Newburyport, 193 U.S. 561, 579 (1904)(followed)
- Tooley v. Napolitano, 586 F.3d 1006, 1010 (D.C. Cir. 2009)(followed)
- Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 33 (1992)(followed)
- Ibrahim v. Dist. of Columbia, Nos. 93-0002, Civ. A. 93-0060, 1993 WL 30814, at *1 (D.D.C. Jan. 29, 1993)(followed)
- Ibrahim v. D.C. Dep't of Corrections, No. 93-7029, 1993 WL 328110 (D.C. Cir. July 7, 1993) (per curiam)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…