Mario Macellari v. Jorge F. Coombs

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of New Jersey grants Mario Macellari leave to proceed in forma pauperis but dismisses his complaint without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). The court concludes that the claims against a state court judge arise from judicial acts protected by judicial immunity and lack sufficient factual support, while allowing Macellari thirty days to file an amended complaint.

Holdings

1. A litigant qualifies to proceed in forma pauperis when the financial information submitted demonstrates that he is unable to pay the court fees. Macellari established that he could not pay the fees, so the court granted his IFP application.
2. The complaint failed to state a claim because its allegations arose from the judge's official judicial duties, did not indicate that the judge acted in the complete absence of jurisdiction, and provided only conclusory support for the alleged due-process violation.
3. The court must dismiss an IFP complaint that is frivolous or malicious or that fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Because Macellari's complaint failed to state a claim, the court dismissed it without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).

Questions Presented

1. Whether Macellari established indigence sufficient to proceed in forma pauperis.
2. Whether the complaint stated a viable due-process claim against a state judge for actions taken while presiding over a pending criminal matter.
3. Whether the complaint was subject to dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) for failure to state a claim.

Disposition

dismissed