In this action, brought pro se, Petitioner's [Plaintiff] voluminous allegations referenced numerous presidents of the United States, public officials, and celebrities, and described violent and sexually explicit events.
The Federal District Court, sua sponte*, dismissed Plaintiff's complaint, concluding that the allegations reflected delusion or fantasy, and then denied Plaintiff's motion for leave to amend his complaint as futile. Plaintiff appealed the lower court's action.
The Second Circuit Court of Appeal, opining that a complaint is frivolous when either:
(1) "the factual contentions are clearly baseless, such as when allegations are the product of delusion or fantasy; or
(2) "the claim is based on an indisputably meritless legal theory";
sustained the District's Court ruling, noting that Plaintiff's allegations recited Plaintiff's implausible associations with "numerous former presidents, public officials, and celebrities".
In addition, the Circuit Court said that the "district court also properly denied [Plaintiff's] request to amend the complaint, explaining that "Repleading would be futile because there is no indication that 'a chance to reframe' would cure the complaint’s substantive deficiencies".
* Sua sponte is a Latin term meaning "of one's own accord" and refers to a decision or action by a judge without a party's requesting such an action or decision.
Click HERE to access the Circuit Court of Appeals' decision posted on the Internet.