Fifth Circuit Issues Guidance To Courts On Handling Frivolous Claims
Some claims are so insubstantial, implausible and devoid of merit that they don't raise to the level of a federal controversy, said the opinion by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
December 11, 2019 at 01:30 PM
4 minute read
A Louisiana attorney who called himself "The God of the Earth Realm," and alleged that defendants tried to monopolize intergalactic foreign trade has lost his appeal before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
The resulting opinion serves as a guide for lower courts who must deal with frivolous, meritless claims. Here, lawyer Edward Moses Jr.'s claims were so frivolous that the government shouldn't be bothered to respond and courts shouldn't be troubled to adjudicate them, said the ruling in Atakapa Indian de Creole Nation v. Louisiana.
"The district court therefore lacked jurisdiction to entertain them," wrote Judge Stuart Kyle Duncan in the opinion, joined by Chief Judge Priscilla Owen and Judge Rhesa Hawkins Barksdale.
Moses, a Baton Rouge solo practitioner, said his case is about sovereignty for his family who are indigenous to the Louisiana region and they take the position that the Louisiana Purchase was invalid. He denied that his claims are frivolous and said he plans to ask the Fifth Circuit to rehear his appeal.
"The court left the gate open and noted that we did make a claim for antitrust against Thompson Reuters, which is important for the case," Moses said. "I pray to God I am capable of fleshing out my arguments for rehearing."
The opinion noted that Moses appears to be the true plaintiff, although he called himself the trustee of the Atakapa Indian de Creole Nation, which isn't a federally recognized Indian tribe.
The district court dismissed the lawsuit for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, finding the defendants had sovereign immunity.
"We need not go that far to resolve this appeal," the Fifth Circuit ruled, explaining that some claims are so insubstantial, implausible and devoid of merit that they don't raise to the level of a federal controversy.
For example, the opinion noted, Moses called himself "His Majesty," and "The Christian King de Orleans," among other titles. His claims were "bizarre," said the opinion. He said the Atakapa were held in "pupilage" by the United States and as "wards" of Louisiana. He sought declarations of rights under a 1795 treaty with Spain and an 1800 treaty with France. In an amended complaint, he sought to add defendants including a long list of world leaders from the United States, Canada, France, Germany and more–even the pope.
"The same document also alleges that the United States and Louisiana seek to monopolize 'intergalactic foreign trade,'" the opinion said. "This was no typographical error: the plaintiff continues to argue on appeal that the defendants are attempting to 'monopolize domestic, international and intergalactic commercial markets.'"
The court refused to try to decipher what it meant, noting that the attempt would suggest the arguments had some colorable merit. The judges found nothing that would present a non-frivolous federal question, the ruling said.
"We could say more, but these examples are enough to show the plaintiff's claims are wholly without merit," the opinion said.
Louisiana's attorney, Matthew Block, executive counsel in the Louisiana Office of the Governor, didn't return a call or email seeking comment before deadline. Neither did Assistant U.S. Attorney Katherine Wharton Vincent, who represented the United States.
The ruling elicited chatter from appellate attorneys on Twitter.
I challenge you to guess the result of this appeal. pic.twitter.com/ysmjpHt0Hb
— Raffi Melkonian (@RMFifthCircuit) December 10, 2019
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'Serious Disruptions'?: Federal Courts Brace for Government Shutdown Threat
3 minute readGovernment Attorneys Are Flooding the Job Market, But Is There Room in Big Law?
4 minute readOvertime Rewind: Texas Court Ruling Unravels FLSA Salary Level Increases
4 minute readTrump, ABC News Settle Defamation Lawsuit Before Depositions
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250