Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Utah v. TD Bank

United States District Court, S.D. New York

December 4, 2019

PAUL UTAH, Plaintiff,
v.
TD BANK; LAW ENFORCEMENT, Defendants.

          ORDER OF DISMISSAL

          COLLEEN MCMAHON, CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         Plaintiff, appearing pro se, brings this action under the Court's federal question jurisdiction, alleging “human rights violations” and “civil rights violations.” By order dated November 22, 2019, the Court granted Plaintiff's request to proceed without prepayment of fees, that is, in forma pauperis (IFP). The Court dismisses the complaint for the reasons set forth below.

         STANDARD OF REVIEW

         The Court must dismiss a complaint, or portion thereof, that is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B), 1915A(b); see Abbas v. Dixon, 480 F.3d 636, 639 (2d Cir. 2007). While the law mandates dismissal on any of these grounds, the Court is obliged to construe pro se pleadings liberally, Harris v. Mills, 572 F.3d 66, 72 (2d Cir. 2009), and interpret them to raise the “strongest [claims] that they suggest, ” Triestman v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 470 F.3d 471, 474-75 (2d Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted) (emphasis in original).

         A claim is frivolous when it “lacks an arguable basis either in law or in fact.” Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 324-25 (1989), abrogated on other grounds by Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007); see also Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 32-33 (1992) (holding that “finding of factual frivolousness is appropriate when the facts alleged rise to the level of the irrational or the wholly incredible”); Livingston v. Adirondack Beverage Co., 141 F.3d 434, 437 (2d Cir. 1998) (“[A]n action is ‘frivolous' when either: (1) the factual contentions are clearly baseless . . .; or (2) the claim is based on an indisputably meritless legal theory.”) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).

         BACKGROUND

         Plaintiff Paul Utah, a Queens resident, filed this complaint regarding events occurring between January 1, 2012, and November 18, 2019. He alleges as follows:

Humiliation, illegal investigations, Targeting from Humans and Law enforcements. Closing my accounts illegally and not letting me open a new account. Using the radio or speaker system. Spreading rumors, lying about bank procedures. Civil Rights Violations, Human Rights Violations, False Claims, Emotional Trauma, Pressing the emergency button, Profiling me, Racial Profiling, Human Eye on me, Eye of Law Enforcements. They profiled me as Homeless and Stupid, intimidation, illegal monitoring of my accounts at TD Bank. Calling the law enforcement while visiting the branches. Using radio while visiting the branches, illegally video recording me while using the branches. Security harassed me and wanted to beat me up.

(ECF Doc. 2 ¶ III.)

         Plaintiff seeks $15 million in damages and injunctive relief.

         DISCUSSION

         Even when read with the “special solicitude” due pro se pleadings, Triestman, 470 F.3d at 474-75, Plaintiff's claims rise to the level of the irrational, and there is no legal theory on which he can rely. See Denton, 504 U.S. at 33; Livingston, 141 F.3d at 437.

         District courts generally grant a pro se plaintiff an opportunity to amend a complaint to cure its defects, but leave to amend is not required where it would be futile. See Hill v. Curcione,657 F.3d 116, 123-24 (2d Cir. 2011); Salahuddin v. Cuomo,861 F.2d 40, 42 (2d Cir. 1988). Because the defects in Plaintiff's complaint cannot be cured with an amendment, the Court declines to ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.