Richter v. New York
Richter v. New York
Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiff pro se Wilburt Richter sues the City and the State of New York, seeking to have the mass transit fares in New York City declared unconstitutional. According to the plaintiff, who was arrested for turnstile jumping,
Therefore, taking all of plaintiffs allegations as true, and viewing them most favorably as required by Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 92 S.Ct. 594, 30 L.Ed.2d 652 (1972), plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. See, e.g., Bourgeois v. Hongisto, 488 F.Supp. 304 (S.D.N.Y. 1980). Furthermore, I find plaintiff’s claim so frivolous that it violates Rule 11, and makes appropriate an award of attorneys fees to the City. See Davis v. Cargill, Inc., 808 F.2d 361 (5th Cir. 1986); Auen v. Sweeney, 109 F.R.D. 678 (N.D.N.Y. 1986) (pro se litigant’s frivolous constitutional challenge of the Internal Revenue Code justifies repayment of taxpayers for costs of defense); see also, In Re Martin-Trigona, 737 F.2d 1254 (2d Cir. 1984). Plaintiff simply may not have a free ride for repeated constitutional railing, which crowds the court’s docket and costs the
So ordered.
. At the time of his arrest, plaintiff was found in possession of cocaine and an unlicensed handgun. In a separate action, plaintiff challenges the constitutionality of gun control. 87 Civ. 1856 (JMW).
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Wilburt J. RICHTER v. The STATE OF NEW YORK and the City of New York
- Status
- Published